Butler, J.

1. The plaintiff m O.S. No. 287 of 1929 and defendant in O.S. No. 203 of 1930 is the appellant. He sued for possession of certain land which he claimed to have been demarcated as his by orders of a Survey Officer dated 30th September 1926 while plaintiffs in O.S. No. 203 of 1930 sued to set the order aside. The latter suit; was instituted on 1st July 1930 and was clearly out of time. The appellants suit was decreed by the District Munsif and dismissed by the Subordinate Judge in appeal who also gave the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 203 of 1930 a decree. The Subordinate Judge found that the defendants had a title by adverse possession and that plaintiff had not proved possession within 12 years of suit, in appeal it is contended that the decision of the Survey Officer was conclusive against the defendants. It is therefore necessary to enquire what the Survey; Officer decided. Ex. A is appellants petition to him. In it he claims title to the lands as forming part of suit No. 251 of which the defendants had added the portion now in dispute to their land (Suit No. 254). The land should therefore be remeasured and re-demarcated. The order of the Survey Officer runs:

The compl