JUDGMENT : Stanley, J.:— The plaintiff's suit was in our opinion properly dismissed by the lower appellate Court. The suit was brought by him to recover possession of a room in an enclosure in an abadi of the village, of which the plaintiff is the zamindar and the defendants are the cultivating tenants. It is found that the defendants' have been in possession of the room in question for a period of 30 years. Now it is apparent that either the tenants are entitled to the room in question as appurtenant to their holding, or if it be not appurtenant to their holding, they have acquired it by adverse possession. 2. Their tenancy is admittedly a subsisting agricultural tenancy. Therefore if the room in question is appurtenant to their holding, as the tenancy has not been determined, the zamindar cannot oust them from possession of the room. If, on the other hand, the room in question is no part of the holding, then it is clear on the finding that the defendants have acquired a title to it by adverse possession. In either view the suit cannot be maintained. It is admitted and appears to be undoubtedly the rule in these Provinces that a tenant is given a room or house in the abadi to live in during the existence of his tenancy. It is difficult to understand how from any point of view tenants, as admittedly the defendants are of the plaintiff, can be properly ejected from the only residence which they possess during the continuance of their tenancy. For these reasons we dismiss the appeal with costs.