Walter Schwabe, C.J.

1. The question referred to the Full Bench is: "Where a Zemindar makes a post settlement Inam giant of a portion of a village with both verams on a permanent kattubadi, is the grantee a landholder within the meaning of Section 3(5) of the Madras Estates Land-Act?"

2. It is not part of the duty of the Full Bench to answer hypothetical questions; and this question must be read in the light of the facts of the case to mean "where a Zemindar makes a post settlement Inam grant of a portion of a village on the terms of the document of February 7, 1875, Exhibit A, is the grantee a landholder within the meaning of Section 3(5) of the Madras Estates Land Act?" By the document the Zemindar of Pittapur assigned to the grantee a portion of the village, with a cist of Rs. 58 in perpetuity and to be used as the grantee pleased. Before that date there had been a grant to another for a term on a cist of Rs. 158. Rs. 100 was stated in the document to be struck off as the grantee proved himself worthy of the Rajas favour and had been rendering services properly. It is not clear to me that by this document the Zemindar granted both varams. The words Melvaram and Kudivaram s