Madhavan Nair, J.

1. In this case the plaintiff-respondent obtained a decree under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act for possession of the property and also for mesne profits. It is argued that the lower Court is wrong in passing a decree for mesne profits, as the passing of such a decree does not come within the scope of a suit under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act. This argument is clearly supported by the decision of this Court in Thavasi v. Arumugam [1915] 30 M. L. J. 326 Following this decision. I set aside the lower Courts decree so far as it relates to mesne profits. In other respects the lower Courts decree will stand. The petitioner will get his costs in this Court.