Sahai, J.

1. The principal question which arises for consideration in this case is what would be the basis of valuation of a suit for ejectment of a licensee when he continues to live in the licensed premises in spite of termination of his licence.

2. The necessary facts of the case may be shortly stated. The plaintiff has instituted the suit, out of which this application for revision arises, on the allegations, inter alia, that he purchased the house described at the foot of the plaint from the original owners, who had allowed the defendants to live in a portion of the house as licensees that the plaintiff asked the defendants on the 21st March, 1952, to vacate the premises and the defendants promised to vacate them in six months, that the defendants, though licensees, did not leave the house on the 21st September, 1952, and continued to stay there, and that they have made themselves liable to be evicted and further to pay mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 15/-per month. The relevant relief claimed by him is:

"(a) That the defendant and his family and dependents be evicted from the house described below and the plaintiff be put in possession over the same."

3. The learned