( 1 ) THESE two appeals are directed against a decree, passed by the learned trial Judge, allowing the plaintiff's claim for ejectment but granting the defendant three years' time or a grace period of three years to vacate the suit property. F. A. No. 144 of 1960 is by the defendant, wherein she challenges the decree for ejectment. The other appeal (F. A. No. 97 of 1960) is by the plaintiff, who has felt aggrieved by the above provision for time or grace period in the decree of the Court below. This latter appeal, however, has spent itself and become infructuous as the grace period in question expired even before its hearing and the only order, which we need pass in this appeal, is to dismiss it on the said ground. F. A. No. 97 of 1960, is, accordingly, dismissed without costs.

( 2 ) TURNING, now, to the defendant tenant's appeal we may at once say that it involves a short question as to the defendant's status, namely, whether she is a thika tenant, entitled to protection under the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act. The relevant facts aren't many and they may be briefly stated here as follows:the defendant was a tenant under the plaintiff's father under a registered