Reilly, J.

1. In this case the plaintiff has sued to recover from the defendant about six acres of land in the village of Chinnamapet with damages. The plaintiff granted a lease of the whole village of Chinnamapet to the defendant as an inamdar for eight years in 1911. After the expiry of that term the defendant surrendered the whole village to the plaintiff with the exception of the six acres with which we are now concerned. On these six acres during the period of his lease the defendant had himself planted casuarina trees, and he claimed the right to remain in possession of that area as an occupancy ryot. The District Munsif of Sholinghur, who heard the suit, found that the defendant was not a ryot but a trespasser and made a decree for the plaintiff for the recovery of possession with Rs. 20 as damages and subsequent mesne profits to be fixed later. Against that decree both the plaintiff and the defendant appealed to the District Judge, the plaintiff claiming that the damages awarded to him were insufficient and the defendant objecting to the whole decree. It has been found by the District Judge that the village of Chinnamapet is an "estate" under the Madras Estates Land