JUDGMENT M.C. Ghose, J. - This is an appeal by the tenants in a suit for enhancement of rent under sec. 30 (5) and for excess rent for excess area under sec. 52 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. In this Court, the learned Advocate appearing for the tenants argues only on the matter of increase of rent under sec. 52. It is urged in the first place that the Courts below had no sufficient evidence to come to the finding that in this estate there was a practice of settlement upon measurement. The reply is that there was some evidence and it was open to the Courts of fact to accept that evidence and come to the conclusion. 2. It is next urged that at any rate the Courts should have allowed a deduction of 10 per cent. in the area as found in the record of rights on the ground that the survey by the settlement staff was scientific and absolutely accurate where-as the previous survey by private men was not so accurate and to allow for the great accuracy of the settlement record a deduction of 10 per cent. ought to be allowed. The learned District Judge mis understood the contention and thought that no deduction should be allowed inasmuch as it was not shown that the settlement officer made any error. It is urged that the contention is not that the settlement officers made any error but that they measure every inch of the land including the ails with absolute accuracy--whereas ordinary private measurement on behalf of zemindars usually omits the ails and also the measurement is not accurate It is right in considering an additional area to reduce the settlement area by 10 per cent. before comparing it with the previous area. 3. The appeal is allowed in part. The area found in the record of rights will be reduced by ten per cent. and then it will be compared with the previous area and thus the excess area will be determined and rent assessed upon it at the rates found by the Courts below. The Appellants will get half of their costs in this Court.