1. It is first urged that there is no evidence of an implied contract to pay rent at the rates entered in the pattas. Rent was paid at these rates for Faslis 1292 to 1296 inclusive. From this circumstance the judge presumed a contract to pay at the same rates for subsequent years, in the absence of evidence to the contrary. The question for determination is whether we can say in second appeal that there is no legally sufficient evidence in support of the finding. As observed by a Full Bench in Venkata-gopal v. Rangappa, I, L. R, 7 M, 365, "Payment of rent in a particular form or at a certain rate for a number of years is presumptive evidence that the parties have agreed to pay and receive rent in that form or at that rate for subsequent years, either party being, of course, at liberty to rebut the presumption." It is urged by the appellants pleader that in that case rent had been paid at the same rate for more than 14 years, and that in Narasimha v. Ramasami, I. L. R, 14 M, 44 and Apparau v. Narasanna, I. L. R, 15 M, 47, such payment for periods of five and six years respectively was hold not to be sufficient to warrant the presumption. We observe however that in the first