Madhavan Nair, J.

1. These second appeals relate to the question whether the Rajah of Venkatagiri is entitled to claim the full amount of jodi for faslis 1332 and 1333 due from the appellants (defendants 1 and 3 in both the suits) who are the agraharamdars of the villages of Sakti Ganeshwarapuram and Kunnam Kulattur. The liability to pay the jodi was not disputed by the agraharamdars; but they contended that they are entitled to deduct from the amount claimed the amount of peishcush due on these villages which they had paid to the Government for the faslis in question. The deduction was claimed under Section 35, Act 2 of 1864, and Section 70, Contract Act. On the first ground, which was the only ground pressed in the lower appellate Court, the Subordinate Judge found against the agraharamdars contention. Both the grounds are urged before me in second appeal.

2. The facts are briefly these: The two villages of Sakti Ganeshwarapuram and Kunnam Kulattur formed part of the Kalahasti Zamindari and were purchased by the plaintiff at a Court sale. After the purchase he did not get the villages separately registered in his name by the Collector under Madras Act 1 of 1876, and so the