Kanhaiya Singh, J.

1. This is a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution to call up and quash the orders of the Commissioner of Trihut Division and the Controller, Darbhanga, dated, respectively, the 13th January, 1956 and the 6th June, 1955, and to prohibit the opposite party from giving effect to the said orders.

2. This application came up for hearing before a Division Bench, and one of the questions strenuously canvassed before it was whether the Kirayanama (deed of lease,) which was not registered, was admissible in evidence. The argument presented on behalf of the opposite party landlord was that even if the Kirayanama was not signed by the landlord in breach of the provisions of Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, there would still be a valid lease for a fixed term within the meaning of Sec.11 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947, (Bihar Act III of 1947).

This contention was based upon the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Om Prakash V/s. Addl. Commr., Patna Division, Patna, AIR 1956 Pat 305 (A). On behalf of the tenant, however, the contention was that the expression lease in Bihar Act III of 1947 has