N S NARAYANASAMI AIYER Vs. VATHIAR RAMA AIYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The finding is that the 1 defendant was let into possession on condition of doing prohit service, and that since 1880, the 1 defendant has ceased to perform prohit service. The mere fact that the 1 defendant has ceased to perform service is not sufficient to make the 1 defendant's possession adverse--Komargowda V/s. Bhimaji Keshiv 23 B. 602.

(2.) Even as to the non-performance of service, we have to point out that the 1 defendant in his written statement alleged that he was performing prohit service, an allegation which the Subordinate Judge appears to have overlooked. We must, therefore, ask the Subordinate Judge to find whether the possession of the 1 defendant is adverse to the plaintiffs and, if so, when it became adverse.

(3.) The finding should be submitted within 6 weeks, and 7 days, will be allowed for filing objections.