1. This is a revision petition by the plaintiff in a small cause suit, which was dismissed by the Munsiff, Kozhikode holding that he had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The revision petition came before a learned judge of this Court, who thought that the question involved was an important one to be considered by a Division Bench. Hence the revision petition has been referred to us.

2. The first question to be considered is whether the respondent is a tenant under the petitioner. The only evidence available regarding the nature of the transaction between the parties is Ex. Al, a compromise entered into by them in O.S. No. 802 of 1967. The compromise recites that there was an arrangement between the parties previously (of October 17,1949) allowing the respondent to put up sheds for the purpose of conducting a school on a plot of land belonging to the petitioner, the respondent agreeing to pay Rs. 30/- a month. Though the amount agreed to was Rs. 30/-per month, the respondent was paying only Rs. 25/- per month. In addition to that plot, another area was also added under Ex. Al; and on the aggregate the respondent had to pay Rs. 40/- per month. The total extent of the land