K.K. Dube, J.

1. Late Bajpai, J. finding a conflict in the various decisions of this Court referred the questions of law hereinafter mentioned

2. The short facts necessary to be stated for appreciating the present controversy are simply these :--

The plaintiff-appellant Mahila Sunder was a widow and was holding certain 'Ryotwari' land as Pucca tenant. She would be a disabled person being one in the class of persons mentioned in sub-section (2) of section 168 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Code). She would also be a disabled person as falling under the class of persons mentioned in section 74 of the M. P. Land Revenue, and Tenancy Act, Samvat 2007 (Act No. 65 of 1950). She granted a lease of her land to defendant-respondent Prahlad.

This was prior to coming into force of Act No. 66 of 1950. Under the law existing at that time, there were no restrictions on sub-letting land by a Pucca tenant. The defendant took possession of the land and continued to be in possession upto 1959 when, on 2nd October 1959, the Code came into force. Sunder now brought a suit for a declaration of her Bhumiswami rights and for a decree in ejectment. The trial Court