JUDGMENT

1. This appeal, along with Nos. 157, 158 and 159, registered and filed to this Court as first appeals from order, arise out of certain litigation in the Revenue Courts. The suit was by a landholder against a person in possession of-land held rent free and the principal relief sought was an order for resumption of the same. The Assistant Collector dismissed the suit, but incidentally came to a finding that the defendant was holding the land in suit rent free under a judicial decision and was, therefore, not liable to pay the revenue assessed thereon. Apparently the Assistant Collector found it necessary to determine this further point, after he had held that the land was not liable to resumption, because of the alternative prayer at the end of the plaint for any other relief which might be deemed beneficial to the plaintiff in the Court's opinion. The plaintiff appealed to the District Judge, who agreed with the Assistant Collector that the land was not liable to resumption. He differed from the Assistant Collector, however, in holding that the land must be deemed to be held by the defendant in proprietary right and that the defendant was liable to pay the revenue assessed t