This appeal arises out of proceedings instituted for enquiring into the mesne profits in pursuance of a decree for possession granted in favour of the plaintiff against defendants 1 to 3. The title to the suit property was in dispute between the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 ; and the suit property was leased to the 4th defendant under Exhibit B-1, dated 26th February, 1944. Subsequently on 19th July, 1949, the plaintiff was declared entitled to the suit property. The title in favour of the plaintiff having been upheld a decree for possession was passed against defendants 1 to 3; but the person who was in actual possession was the 4th defendant the present appellant. In the application for ascertaining the mesne profits the plaintiff claimed mesne profits from all the defendants, viz., defendants 1 to 4. The 4th defendant’s contention is that in so far as he is concerned he was put in possession by defendants 1 to 3, that he has paid the rents to them, that he is not liable and that the right of the plaintiffs to recover could therefore be only against defendants 1 to 3. The Courts below, however, rejected that contention, and held that all the defendants are liable. It i