1. The plaintiff in this case is the Mokhasadar of Viravalli in the old Zamindari of Nuzvid, and the suit is to eject certain ryots from the lands of which they are in occupation. The question for decision raised in the issues is whether the defendants have the right of occupancy in the lands. The District Munsif came to the conclusion that the plaintiff was entitled to eject the defendants. The Subordinate Judge arrived at a different conclusion. The first point raised in Second Appeal is that there is no presumption in cases like this that the occupying ryots have a permanent right in the lands in their possession. The argument is that the presumption that an inamdar has only a melvaram right applies only to the case of inams granted by a Zamindar, and chiefly to the cases of small plots of land which constitute minor inams. The finding in this case is that the Mokhasa was granted by a Zamindar of Nuzvid. The Inam Register has been brought to our notice. We are unable to say that the Subordinate Judge was wrong in saying that it was a Nuzvid Zamindar that granted the Mokhasa originally. But assuming that this was not the case we do not think that that would make any diffe