Sidney Wadsworth, Officiating C.J.

1. The respondent has obtained a decree for the possession of the village of Kaduveli which is a part of the Tanjore Palace Estate. The appellant who is the tenant claims that the suit lands are situated in an estate governed by the Madras Estates Land Act and that he has occupancy rights therein and cannot be evicted. The trial Court has held that, whatever was the position before the amendment of the Madras Estates Land Act by the Madras Act, XVIII of 1936, the lands must now be deemed to be part of an estate under the Estates Land Act. It has also negative the claim of the plaintiff that these are private lands within the definition in Section 3(10) of that Act. But it has held that the defendant is not entitled to resist the plaintiffs claim for possession because the occupancy right in these lands is held not by the defendant but by a previous tenant. In appeal it is contended that this finding regarding the subsistence of the occupancy right of the previous tenant is erroneous; but the respondent contends that even granting so much, the appellant must fail because the lower court erred in holding that the lands in suit are not private