1. The appellant instituted the suit out of which this appeal has arisen for recovery of arrears of rent from the defendants and also for declaration of a charge on one-sixth share in the putni mahal in the terms of the contract creating a darpatni. This one-sixth share of the putni had since then come into the hands of defendant No. 5. A further prayer was made that if the decretal amount was not paid amicably within the time fixed, it might be realised by sale of the charged property and if even that was not sufficient to realise the amount, by sale of other properties belonging to the defendants.

2. The suit was contested by defendant No. 5 alone. The main defence taken on his behalf was that the one-sixth share of the putni, which he had purchased from the original darpatnidar was not liable to be charged for the arrears of rent. It was contended on his behalf that section 168a of the Bengal Tenancy Act being a bar to the execution of a decree for arrears of rent due in respect of a tenure or holding by attachment and sale of any movable or immovable property other than the defaulting tenure, the contract made at the time of the creation of the darputni was not enforce