The Chief Justice:

This Second Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and decree of the learned IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 23.9.2003 passed in A.S.No.135 of 2000.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. We are deeply distressed by the facts of this case. The appellant is a Public Sector Corporation and therefore was expected to behave like an ideal person, but in this case we find that it has been illegally retaining possession of the property in dispute for 16 years after 1989 when its lease had admittedly come to an end. These days, unfortunately, some people are illegally holding on to the property over which they have no right to continue in possession once the period of the lease or grant ceases to exist. This is most improper and cannot be appreciated by this Court, particularly since the appellant which is a Public Sector Undertaking must know how to respect the law.

4. The suit, from which this appeal has arisen, was filed by the respondents for recovery of vacant possession of the property in dispute and for damages till the date of handing over vacant possession.

5. The facts of the case are that the suit property