The appellant in the second appeals is the defendant in the suits, namely O.S.Nos.308 and 310 of 1999 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Nagapattinam, laid by the respondents/plaintiffs for recovery of possession of the suit properties and for consequential past and future profits.

2. According to the respondents/plaintiffs, they are the owners of the suit properties. Even though the appellant/defendant is the tenant in the suit properties for monthly rent, the respondents/plaintiffs terminated the tenancy by 30.6.1999 and directed the appellant/defendant to hand over vacant possession of the suit properties on 1.7.1999. Since the appellant/defendant refused to do so, the respondents/plaintiffs laid the said suits.

3.1. The appellant/defendant resisted the suits contending that he entered into two agreements of sale on 3.2.1996 with the respondents/plaintiffs to purchase each of the suit properties for a sum of Rs.5,50,000/-, when he was already in possession of the suit properties as a tenant. After paying an advance of Rs.56,000/- towards each of the sale agreements even dated 3.2.1996, the appellant/defendant paid a sum of Rs.19,000/- towards each of the suit