JUDGMENT

Mitter, J. - This appeal is on behalf of the defendants and arises out of a suit for possession. The plaintiffs' case is that the land in suit belonged to pro forma defendant 23 who had let it out to them. It is on the basis of this tenancy that the plaintiffs have instituted the suit for possession. The defendants in their written statement challenged the title of the plaintiffs and they further set up a right to use the land for the purpose of steeping jute, etc., a right in the nature of an easement. The Court of first instance found that the plaintiffs had not been able to establish their tenancy under defendant 23 and also found that the contesting defendants had not been able to substantiate their claim of easement as against the landlord. In this view of the matter, it negatived the claim of the principal defendants and also dismissed the plaintiff's suit on the basis that they had no title. An appeal was preferred by the plaintiffs. The lower appellate Court found that the plaintiffs had established their tenancy right and accordingly decreed the suit with a direction for ascertainment by the Court of first instance of mesne profits. Before the lower appellate Court