1. The suit out of which this second appeal arises was instituted by the plaintiff for ejecting the first and second defendants from certain lauds of which they were in possession. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants are tenants at will or tenants from year to year, and that the tenancy was determined by notice to quit. The lands are held on ryotwari tenure under Government, and the plaintiff is admittedly the pattadar. On the other hand it is admitted that the defendants and their predecessors have been in possession for a very long time - about 100 years. The plaintiff produced no evidence to show that he let the defendants into possession of the lands, or any other evidence of a contract of tenancy entered into at any particular time. His case is that he is the kudivaramdar of the lauds and that the defendants are his tenants.

2. The defendants allege, on the other hand, in their written statement, that they are persons entitled to hold the lands permanently; that they have been in enjoyment for a long time, and that they are the kudivaramdars, the plaintiff being entitled only to melwaram.

3. The District Munsif dismissed the suit. He held that the plaintiff must be