JUDGMENT

Bennet, J. - This is a second appeal by the plaintiff a portion of whose suit has been dismissed. The plaintiff sued as the zamindar of a certain village in Jaunpur District, stating that the defendants were tenants and that in certain plots with which the defendants had no concern the defendants had planted a large number of Mahua and mango trees and bamboo clumps. The two plots in question Nos. 437/2/2 and 424/1 comprise about 9 1/2 acres. The plaint asked that the plaintiff might be put in possession of these plots by removal of the trees planted by the defendants. The defendants set up various pleas admitting that the trees existed on the land in dispute against the will of the plaintiff and claiming that the defendants were former zamindars and that the land in question was not sold when their zamindari was sold and that they had rights in the land in question and that the land constituted a grove. An issue was referred to the Revenue Court which found that the defendants were not grove-holders in the land in question, and this finding of the Revenue Court was upheld by the lower appellate Court. The Court of first instance applied Article 32, Limitation Act, to the ca