JUDGMENT 1. In this appeal, which arises out of a suit for contribution, the only question raised on behalf of the Defendant-Appellant is, whether the Courts below were right in holding that the apportionment of rent should be on the basis of the present assets of the different portions of the tenure which have passed into different hands. We are of opinion that this question must be answered in the affirmative. 2. The contention of the Defendant-Appellant was that the apportionment should have been made upon the basis of the assets of the different villages at the time of the creation of the original tenure. But then the tenure that was created was one tenure in favour of one party. There was no division. It is only when different portions of the tenure have passed to different persons that the question of apportionment arises ; and the right basis must be the basis of the present assets. 3. The appeal therefore fails and is dismissed with costs. This judgment also governs appeal No. 787 of 1900.