Petheram, C.J:— We think that this Rule must be discharged. The Rule has been granted to set aside an order of the Munsif entertaining a claim to a certain property which was attached and ottered for sale as being a portion of a particular man's tenure, on the ground that his jurisdiction was barred by the operation of sec. 170 of the Rent Act.
In my opinion the operation of that section is confined to claims to the tenure, and not to claims which are adverse to the tenure, and in which the nature of the question to be tried is, whether the property claimed is part of the tenure or not. The claimant in this case claims no interest whatever in the tenure. He is not claiming to be the tenant of the Plaintiff. He only says “the property you have attached as a portion of the tenure is not a portion of it; that is a property which I hold under a distinct title.” Under these circumstances, we think that the case does not come within sec. 170 of the Rent Act, and therefore the ordinary jurisdiction of the Munsif under sec. 278 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not set aside and that he had a right to entertain this matter, and that, therefore, this Rule must be discharged, it having been obtained merely on the ground that the Munsif had no jurisdiction to entertain it. The opposite party will have his costs which we assess at one gold-mohur.
S.C.S
Rule discharged.