JUDGMENT :- The 9th defendant is the appellant. The decree in the case was for recovery of the property with arrears of rent at 161/2 parahs (local) of paddy per annum till date of deposit of compensation for improvements found due to the defendant, and thereafter mesne profits at the rate of Rs.180/- per annum. Compensation for defendants improvements having been deposited on 7-2-1955, the plaintiff claimed mesne profits from that date. The 9th defendant objected to the claim on the ground that all proceedings in delivery of possession of a leasehold having been stayed by statute his possession was not wrongful and as such the plaintiff is not entitled to mesne profits from him.

2. The effect of the statute prohibiting eviction of the tenants, whether in execution of the decree or otherwise, is statutorily to continue the tenancy even though the lease has been determined. This is so even if the determination of the lease by the decree of court was before the statute prohibiting resumption of the holding came into force. In such cases the effect of the provision debarring recovery of the property from, the lessee by the landlord is to revive the tenancy as between them. Such a new t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document