SENGODA GOUNDAN Vs. VARADAPPAN ALIAS RAJU GOUNDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the plaintiff (appellant) held a pattah for certain trees on land in certain survey fields, and the defendants (respondents) held the pattah for the land. The plaintiff had possession of the trees for more than twenty years prior to 1906. In that year, the Revenue authorities cancelled the pattah which they had given to the plaintiff. The defend, ants then interfered with the plaintiff s enjoyment of the trees and deprived him of their possession. The plaintiff therefore brought this suit to recover possession of the trees and for mesne profits.

(2.) The District Munsif gave him a decree but the District Judge reversed it on appeal and dismissed the suit. We think the decree of the District Munsif is right.

(3.) The successive Standing Orders of the Board of Revenue Madras, in regard to tree pattahs are found at pages 5, 6 and 7 of Maclean s Edition of 1878, and at pages 36 and 40 of the Government Editions of 1900 and 1907 respectively.