JUDGMENT 1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Officiating Additional District Judge of Dacca, dated the 5th July 1900. The suit, out of which this appeal arises was one brought to set aside a revenue sale on the ground, amongst others that there were no arrears for which the sale could be held. The estate was sold for arrears of about Rs. 5 and 2 pies, and this amount was said to be in arrear on the 12th of January 1896. The sale took place after that date. There is no dispute that there was a sum due from the estate on the 12th of January 1896. But the learned pleader for the Appellant says that as the Board of Revenue has by rule fixed the 12th of January and the 28th of March as the latest dates for payment of arrears of revenue due from the estate, he was not bound to pay on the 12th of January and the estate could not be sold for arrears due on that date and that he was at liberty to pay up to the 28th of March. We do not think that this contention is right. The demand upon the estate amounted to Rs. 20-4-3 per annum, and there were four kists in which this amount should be paid. The arrear of Rs. 5-0-2 pies, which was unpaid on the 12th of January, was not due for the January kist, but it was due for the November fast, and, as it was not paid on the latest day of payment, i.e., the 12th January, the Revenue authorities had every right to sell the estate on a subsequent date. The learned pleader for the Appellant contends that he was at liberty to pay up to the 28th March. We have examined the rule of the Board of Revenue referred to by him, and we do not think that that is the meaning of the rule. The rule seems to be that the latest date for payment of arrears due for a kist previous to January is the 12th of January and the latest date for payment of arrears for a kist due after the 12th of January is the 28th of March. The Plaintiff was not at liberty to pay the whole demand of one year in one kist on the 28th of March. The Plaintiff was not at liberty to pay the whole demand of one year in one kist on the 28th of March. If that were so, then all zemindars, whatever the amount of Government revenue due from them would, might pay on the 28th of March, and all sales which take place in Bengal for arrears due on other dates would be illegal. That cannot be the meaning of the rule and no such meaning has ever been put on it. 2. The appeal is dismissed with costs.