(1.) In this case the suit was brought by the plaintiff, alleging that by custom the plaintiff was entitled to half the fruits of a certain tree which was upon his estate, but within the homestead of the defendant who was a tenant of the plaintiff. The custom was alleged to exist with regard to this tree, inasmuch as it was upon land in respect of which the tenant paid no money-rent but had to give half its fruits, and it was alleged that the landlord was entitled to receive half the fruits of this particular tree.
(2.) We are told that this is a test case which may govern other cases than the one now in question.
(3.) The Munsif who tried the case in the first Court decided in favour of the plaintiff, and held, as I read his judgment, that there was the custom.