S. Nainar Sundaram, J.

1. The defendants are the appellants in this second appeal. The plaintiff is the respondent. The plaintiff laid the suit for an injunction. His case is that his father, late one Kuttianna Gounder, was a cultivating tenant of the suit properties, which belonged to a trust, and on his demise the plaintiff continued as the cultivating tenant of the suit properties, and the defendants who claim themselves to be alienees from the trustees tried to interfere with his possession. The defendants did not admit the claims of the plaintiff that he is in possession of the suit properties as cultivating tenant and further they questioned the maintainability of the suit of the present nature before the civil Court. The controversy was resolved in favour of the plaintiff and first Court decreed the suit as prayed for, on 22.6. 1978, holding that the plaintiff is in possession of the suit properties as a cultivating tenant; the suit as laid is maintainable and the plaintiff is entitled to have his possession protected by an injunction. The defendants appealed and the lower appellate Court found no warrant to differ from the views of the first Court and dismissed the a