1. In this second appeal by the defendant two questions arise for determination. The defendant-appellant urges that there has not been a valid termination of the tenancy as required under S.106 of the T. P. Act for the landlord to recover possession, and secondly he claims value of improvements before eviction. Certain shop rooms and a portico belonging to the plaintiff were let out to the defendant. The rent agreed upon was Re. 1/- per day, Alleging default in the payment of rent after 28 91967 the plaintiff filed O.S. No. 587/68 for eviction of the defendant and for recovery of arrears of rent. in that suit the latter relief alone was granted as the court was of the view that there was no proper termination of tenancy. Thereafter the plaintiff issued a registered notice on 511970 demanding surrender of the building with arrears of rent by 10 21970. The defendant did not comply with that notice and so the plaintiff filed the present suit. The defendant admitted the tenancy and pleaded that the amount of arrears claimed by the plaintiff is not due and also contended that there has not been a valid termination of tenancy. There was a further claim for value of improvemen