Fletcher, J.:-

This is an appeal from a decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Cuttack, dated the 28th March, 1912. The defendants are the appellants before us. The plaintiff brought this suit to recover possession of certain lands from the defendants. One of the issues raised in the case was whether the suit was barred by limitation. The learned Judge found that the suit was barred by limitation ; but he considered that as the title was originally in the plaintiff, he ought to give the plaintiff relief by way of making a declaration of title in his favour. Against that decision, the present defendants have appealed to this Court.

From the facts found by the learned Judge of the Court below, it is clear that the case is barred by limitation. The learned Judge also found so. The defendants' ancestor had a lease of this property, which expired more than 12 years ago. At any rate, the learned Judge has found that no fresh agreement was entered into between the parties nor was there any evidence from which it could be inferred that there was a new tenancy. The question, therefore, arises, " Does Art. 139 of the Second Schedule to the Indian Limitation Act apply to a case like this