1. The facts found by the lower appellate Court and which in Second Appeal we have to accept are, that the uncle of the plaintiff, one Jayachar, was in possession of the site mentioned in the plaint since 1881, that he let defendants 1 and 2 into possession of the same in 1892 under a lease for a term of 5 years, that the 3rd defendant, the appellant in this Court, obtained possession of the same from the 1st and 2nd defendants and that Jayachar died in 1898 shortly before the institution of this suit, leaving a will devising the site to the plaintiff and admitting in the description of the site that it had all along been the plaintiffs property and that he, Jayachar, held it only as the plaintiffs agent. The District Judge also finds that the case of the 3rd defendant that the site belongs to him and that his agent allowed defendants 1 & 2 to enter into possession thereof is false, but that he obtained possession from the 1st and 2nd defendants during the term of the lease under which they had been let into possession by the plaintiffs uncle on the footing that up to the date of his death or at any rate until the 3rd defendant obtained possession of the site from the 1st a