1. Defendants 3 to 5, the legal representative of the first defendant are the appellants.

2. When the plaintiff was a minor, his grandmother and mother acting as guardian entrusted the plaint property, about 54 cents of land, to one Chockalingam Pillai for the construction of a Cinema Theatre on 19-11-1947 (Ext. BI). The rights of Chockalingam Pillai became vested in the 1st defendant and now have devolved on defendants 3 to 5 after his death. The plaintiff contends that the transaction is not a lease, but only a licence. He therefore filed the suit for a direction that he be permitted to deposit Rs. 51,309/-, the value of the theatre payable to the 1st defendant and then allow him to be in exclusive possession of the property and for other reliefs;

3. The first defendant resisted the claim contending that the transaction was a lease of land for a commercial purpose, the lessee constructed a Cinema Theatre for such commercial purpose and therefore is entitled to the protection under S.106 of Act 1 of 1964. There was also a further contention that the land was registered as Sree Pandaravaka land in the revenue records and the plaintiff's rights, if any, have been lost by o