( 1 ) I agree with the conclusions drawn by my brother Bishambhar Dayal in his judgment.

( 2 ) WHAT is required under Sections 240-A and 240-B of the Act is that the land should be held "or be deemed to be held" by an adhivasi. "held" in this context means "owned by", "belonging to", "included in the holding of". A person can own. land, or land can be included in the holding of a person, without his being in actual possession of it; whether he owns the land or it is included in his holding is essentially a question of title quite distinct from the question, of possession. Title may synchronise with possession but can also be in one person while the possession is in another. Sections 240-A and 240-B do not take possession at all into consideration; if a person has title as an adhivasi over the land it is within their scope irrespective of whether he is in actual possession or not. If the legislature had intended that the land should, not only be held by an adhivasi but also, be in his possession one would have expected it to use some additional words. In the law of tenancy the word "hold", Goes not include the idea of possession. Of course there must be title, i. e. , i