Ramaswami, J.

1. The question to be examined in these appeals is whether the plaintiff landlord is entitled to a money decree against the defendants for the years alleged.

2. It is not controverted that plot No. 874, khata No. 157, area 3.40 acres, was recorded in survey in the name of Gena and Debi Singh in equal shares. The plaintiff brought Rent Suit No. 25 of 1947 against the heirs of Gena with respect to half the area comprised in khata No. 157. The heirs of Debi Singh intervened in the suit and claimed that they had purchased by a registered kebala dated 21st January 1904 the interest of Gena. The plaintiff had brought Rent Suit No. 28 of 1947 with respect to the other half share of Khata No. 157 against the sons and grandsons of Debi Singh who were recorded in survey papers. The trial Court gave a decree in favour of the plaintiff against the heirs of Debi Singh in both the suits. The decision of the trial Court has been reversed in appeal by the learned Subordinate Judge who held that the suits were not maintainable and the plaintiff was not entitled even to a money decree in either of the suits.

3. On behalf of the plaintiff who has instituted the present appeals l