A tenant cannot acquire title by adverse possession of land that is included in the demise.

( 1 ) THIS Is an appeal from the decree dated September 7, 1975 passed by Dipak Kumar Sen, J. in a suit filed by Nirmal Chandra Roy and Sk. Jagadiswari Dassi against the appellants and other respondents. The learned Judge gave a judgment whereby he ordered and decreed that the defendants do deliver up quiet and peaceful possession to the plaintiffs of the land and premises No. 104, Lower Chitpur Road, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the premises); do pay Rs. 1,500 on account of arrears of rent for ten months from March to December, 1961. He also ordered and decreed that a mandatory injunction be and the same is granted against the defendants except the defendant Receiver Shri T. Dastidar directing them at their own costs and expenses to close up all the openings and connections in premises No. 105, Lower Chitpur Road, Calcutta so as to make the two premises Nos. 104 and 105 Lower Chitpur Road, Calcutta, independent of each other and further ordered and decreed that all the defendants except the defendant Receiver do pay to the plaintiffs mesne profits in respect of the premises commencing from January 1, 1962 until possession is delivered to the plaintiffs. He further ordered and decreed that Mr. S. A. Murshed, Advocate be and he is thereby appointed Receiver to enquire into the mesne profits on the basis of the average rate of rent payable per month by the tenants of the premises commencing from Jan. 1, 1962 until possession is delivered to the plaintiffs.

( 2 ) THREE of the defendants, namely, defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 have preferred this appeal.

( 3 ) THE case of the plaintiffs in the plaint is shortly as follows: By an Indenture of lease dated March 3, 1911, one Bhola Nath Dhur, since deceased, demised to one Ahmed Mamooji Amolia since deceased, the land and premises for a term of fifty years commencing from the date the lessee Ahmed Mamooji Amolia was put in possession of the premises. The lease provided, inter alia, that the lessee would pay rent (i) for the first ten years @ Rs. 115 per month; (ii) for the second ten years @ Rs. 125 per month; (iii) for the third ten years @ Rs. 135 per month; (iv) for the fourth ten years @ Rs. 155 per month -- the rent of each month being payable within the fifteenth day of the succeeding month and the lessee being entitled to a rebate of Rs. 5 per month in case of punctual payment as aforesaid.

( 4 ) PURSUANT to the lease the lessee was put into possession of the premises in or about Dec. , 1911. The original lessor died. Thereafter, by devolution of interest and by mutual partition lessor's interest vested in the plaintiff. The original lessee who was governed by Sunni School of Mohamedan Law died many years ago : and the leasehold interest devolved on his heirs. A suit was instituted between the heirs of the lessee which included leasehold interest of the lessee. In that suit Shri T. Dastidar, Advocate was appointed Receiver. Defendants Nos. 1 to 10 (h) are the heirs and legal representatives of the original lessee. Defendant No. 11 is the Receiver. The case of the plaintiffs is that the leasehold interest expired by efflux of time in or about Dec. , 1961. The defendants yet remain in possession of the premises. They have failed and neglected to make over possession to the plaintiffs in respect of the demise. The plaintiffs are entitled to ten months rent at the rate of Rs. 155 per month in terms of Indenture and claim on account thereof Rs. 1,550. The plaintiffs claim mesne profits @ Rs. 40 per diem from the expiry of the lease as the reasonable letting value of the said property at the end of 1961.

( 5 ) FURTHER case of the plaintiffs is that at the time of making the lease dated March 3, 1911 there existed a 'road alignment line' running parallel to Lower Chitpur Road along the frontage of the premises No. 104, Lower Chitpur Road, Calcutta being the portion of the premises contemplated to be acquired by the Corporation of Calcutta. So the said lease which wa