1. It is found that the land in suit forms part of the Natham Paramhoke of Sadayaneri village. The village lands appear to have been held by the ryots according to Panganazi but in the case of this natham they were enjoying it in common for their communal purposes.
2. The defendants were in possession for some time but such possession is found to have been permissive. The defendants then abandoned their permissive possession, and the community again began to use it for communal purpose till March 1903.
3. In March 1903, the Head Assistant Collector directed that the land should be given to the defendants and entered in the register kept for natham lands for cultivation for which the charge of highest dry rate should be made. In the next year the defendant raised crops for which they paid assessment to Government.
4. On the facts found that the land belongs to the village community and that they were in possession till 1903, the plaintiffs are entitled to recover. The action of the Revenue Officials in 1903 in assessing the land as natham, and giving it to the defendants will not deprive the plaintiffs of their right to the land.
5. We are of opinion that the contention that the suit must fail as the Secretary of State is not made a party is unsound. Our decision, of course, cannot bind the Secretary of State.
6. The second appeal is dismissed with costs.