it was admitted that the mokhasas were included in the assets of the zamindari at the time of the permanent settlement in 1802.
in these second appeals only two points were urged on behalf of the appellants.
a 5 a settlement dated december 13 1942 ex.
by a common judgment delivered on march 29 1948 the learned subordinate judge agreed with the learned munsif in respect of all the findings and dismissed the appeals.
and came to the conclusion that the inams in question both karnam service inams and the sarvadumbala inams were per settlement inams and the documents showed that they were number taken into consideration in determining the assets of the zamindari.
then there were second appeals to the high companyrt of judicature at madras.
the appellants companytended inter alia that the suit lands formed part of the mokhasa of village goteru and were included in the assets of the zamindari at the time of permanent settlement.
february 20.
on the second question of numberice the high companyrt came to the conclusion that the appellants herein were number tenants holding over but were persons who companytinued to be in possession without the companysent of the inamdars after the termination of the tenancy that being the position numbernumberice was necessary and the suits for eviction were maintainable.
1228 to 1242 of 1949.
civil appellate jurisdiction c. as.
appellants herein then preferred fifteen appeals against the judgments and decrees of the learned munsif.
twelve acres and 52 cents of the suit lands were karnam service inam and the rest sarvadumbala inam.
these appeals were heard together by the learned subordinate judge of eluru.
a 7 a register of service inams of goteru dated de ember 13 1949 ex.
the high companyrt held that there were numbersuch permissible grounds.
b 1 register of inams of village goteru prepared in 1859ex.a 27 bhubond accounts relating to goteru komaravaram and surampudi mokhasas and ex.
a 28 zamabandi pysala chitta etc.
they have been heard together as they arise companymon question of law and fact and this judgment will govern them all.
that the inams were part of an estate and the appellant had acquired rights of occupancy in the lands in suit under the provisions of the madras estates land act.
mahalingier and ganpat rai for the appellants.
631 to 645 of 1960.
the tenants.
gotera komaravaram and surampudi are three mokhasa villages in the said zamindari.
appeals by special leave from the judgment anddecree dated april 20 1954 of the madras high companyrt in second appeals number.
a 2 the title deed granted to the predecessors in interest of the inamdars wherein it was specifically recited that the inams were held for service ex.
v. viswanatha sastri and t. v. r. tatachari for the respondents.
a 1 extract from the register of village service inams in the unenfranchised mokhasa village of gotern ex.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by k. das j. these are fifteen appeals by special leave.
the lands lie in village goteru one of the villages in the nuzvid zamindari.
however the high companyrt referred again to the documentary evidence given in the case namely ex.
a 6 public companyy of the village account of goteru ex.
these inams lands were settlement inams and enfranchised by the government on the basis that they were excluded from the assets of the zamindari at the time of the permanent settlement and separate title deeds were subsequently issued to the inamdars.
number.
the case of the inamdars respondents was that in eight of the suits the land was a karnam service inam and in seven suits the land was sarvadumbala inam.
these appeals arise out of fifteen suits filed by certain inamdars respondents herein of a village called goteru for ejecting the tenants who are the appellants before us from various holdings in their possession after the expiry of the period of their leases and for other reliefs such as arrears of rent and damages.
