Judgement

Appeal (No. 115 of 1924) from a decree of the High Court (October 28, 1919) varying a decree of the District Court of Kistna at Masulipatam which affirmed a decree of the Court of the Suits Deputy Collector.

The suit was brought by the father of the appellants against defendants now represented by the respondents for a decree directing the defendants to accept a puttah tendered to them by the appellants under the Madras Settled Estates Act, 1908, and to execute a corresponding muchalka.

The questions arising were (1.) As to the effect of s. 12 of the Act where a ryot had contracted before the Act that all rights in trees on his holding should belong to the landholder ; (2.) Whether 297 acres included in a lease before the Act were ryoti land within s. 3, sub-s. 16, and s. 6 of the Act.

On the first question the High Court (Seshagiri Ayyar and Napier JJ.), reversing the District Judge, held that the reservation did not operate beyond the term of the lease.

The facts and the terms of s. 12 of the Act appear from the judgment of the Judicial Committee.

1929. May 10, 13. P. V. Subba Row for appellant No. 2.

Dunne K.C. and Narasimham for the respondents.

July 1. The judgment o