1. The principle laid down in the base referred to by the District Judge, Ganpatgir Guru Bholagir v. Ganpatgir I.L.R. 3 Bom. 230-is not applicable to a suit under section 283, act xiv of 1882. The ruling in Parvati v. Kisansing Printed Judgment for 1881 p. 121, which we understand has always been followed in this Court, shows that although the plaintiff may pray in such a suit to be awarded possession, the plaint is still to? be treated as falling under Article 17, Clause 1 of Schedule 2 of Act VII of 1870, and chargeable with only a 10-rupee stamp. We must, therefore, reverse the decree of the Court below and remand the case for a decision on the merits. Costs of this appeal and in the Court below to abide the result.