VEERASWAMI, C.J. :- The Letters Patent Appeal is posted before a Full Bench, because Kailasam, J. and Mahajan, J., differed on the question whether the tenants under a usufructuary mortgagee are entitled, after redemption of the usufructuary mortgage, to claim protection under the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955, as against the mortgagor. The usufructuary mortgage was created on 2-3-1924. Respondents 1 and 2 were inducted into the land by the usufructuary mortgagee in 1957 as tenants. On 19-6-1964, the mortgage was redeemed. The mortgagor-owner brought the, suit for possession and mesne profits. The first two Courts agreed in decreeing the suit. But in second appeal Ramanujam, J., reversed the decree relying on Prabhu v. Ramdeo, AIR 1966 SC 1721, and dismissed the suit. But he granted leave. In the Letters Patent Appeal Kailasam, J. took the view that the respondents were not entitled to the statutory protection, while Maharajan, J., took the opposite view.

2. The Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955, was enacted for the protection from eviction of cultivating tenants in certain areas in the State of Madras. It provided for statutory prote