Dr. T. N. Singh, J. -

1. This is defendants• appeal who lost in both the Courts. Two short questions of law are agitated in this appeal and as such, it is not necessary for me to make detailed investigation of respective cases of parties pleaded and proved In Courts below.

2. To dispose of the two contentions which appellants' counsel has raised in this appeal, I may refer immediately to the few admitted facts relevant to the questions agitated. The plaintiffs themselves based their claim on the fact that the suit land was Zamindari land and they were bolding the land as Pukhta mourusi tenant while, on the other hand, the defendants themselves claimed that they were sub-tenants under the plaintiffs. The two provisions of the M. B. Zamindari Abolition Act, for short, the 'Act' on "which the twin contentions agitated by Shri Vajpai are based may be read in Section 38 and 56 of the Act. Indeed, counsel's contention based on Section 315 further is that because of the steps taken by the defendants there under in 1955 to assert their statutory right, they acquired a tide in the suit land' adverse to the plaintiffs and as such, the suit was barred by Article 65 of the Limitation Act. S