JUDGMENT 1. We are of opinion that the agreement Exhibit III is admissible for the purpose of showing the nature of the defendants possession and the findings are that the defendant has held the land rent-free since the date of the agreement. On the authority of Kurri Veerareddi v. Kurri Bapireddi 16 M.L.J. 395 it may be that notwithstanding Exhibit III the plaintiff is entitled to eject the defendant, but, in our opinion, he is not entitled to enforce on him the acceptance of a pattah. 2. We must set aside the decree of the District Judge and restore that of the Court of first instance with costs here and in the lower appellate Court.