Arup Kumar Goswami, J.

1. Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. P. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. The second appeal is preferred by the defendant No. 1 against the judgment and decree dated 05.10.2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Jorhat in Title Appeal No. 14/2005, dismissing the appeal by confirming the judgment and decree dated 06.12.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Jorhat in Title Suit No. 92/1997, whereby the suit of the plaintiff was decreed.

3. This second appeal was admitted to be heard by an order dated 18.01.2006 on the following substantial questions of law:

"1. Whether a tenant under a void lease becomes a lessee once rent is paid and accepted and whether courts below acted illegally in holding the appellant as permissive occupier only and granting the benefit of a lease?

2. Whether notice under Section 106 of T.P. Act, is a must and is to prove even if the tenancy is treated as monthly and whether courts below erred in holding that no notice under Section 106 of T.P. Act is required merely because lease deed was not registered although rent was accept