JUDGMENT :- The plaintiff who filed a suit for declaration that he is a cultivating tenant entitled to the benefits of the Madras Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955, and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit lands as such tenant and was successful in the trial court but failed in the lower appellate court is the appellant. The trial court held that the transaction under Ex. A-1 was a lease. But the lower appellate court held it to be a licence. The question in this second appeal is as to whether the transaction under Ex. A-1 executed between the plaintiff and the defendant is a lease or a licence.

2. It appears that the suit land belongs to one Ellamman temple and that it is a garden where Jasmine plants have been raised. The plaintiff was put in possession of the flower garden for a period of ten years on 5-5-1956 for an annual payment of Rs. 350/-. As the plaintiff committed default in payment of the said amount for a year the defendant filed a petition before the Revenue Court under the provisions of the Madras Cultivating Tenants Protection Act in 1961 and obtained an order of eviction. But later

Click Here to Read the rest of this document