Patanjali Sastri, J.

1. This Civil Revision Petition came on for, hearing before one of us in the first instance and was referred to a Division Bench as it raises questions of some difficulty and importance regarding the scope of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code.; -

2. The petitioner is the zamindar of Venkatagiri and the respondents are some of the tenants of Tirumur, a village in the zamindari. They applied to the Sub-Collector of Gudur for relief under the Madras Agriculturists Relief Act, 1938 in respect of the arrears of rent payable by them, depositing certain amounts Whicji, they claimed to be the rents due to the petitioner for fasli 1347 as required by Section 15(4) of the Act. The zamindar contended that, as the tenants held their lands on what is known as the waram tenure, they were liable to pay rent in kind being a moiety of the gross produce of their respective holdings, and that, theref re the deposit of money on the basis of cash, rents was due not compliance with the provisions of the Act. He further pleaded that the sums deposited even if regarded as the value of the landlords share of the produce,, were much