Since caveat was entered, I heard the learned counsel on both sides at the time of admission itself.

2. In both these Second Appeals, defendants are the appellants. Landlord filed a suit for eviction as O.S.No.2367 of 1981 on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli. Another suit was filed by landlord as O.S.No.3191 of 1981 on the file of same court for mandatory injunction directing tenant to demolish the unauthorised construction and restore the leased portion to its original position. Before institution of suit, lease was also terminated by registered notice under Sec.106 of Transfer of Properties Act.

3. Reason for terminating tenancy was that the tenant defaulted payment of rent for six months from January, 1979 and when demand was made, defendants put false contention. After termination of tenancy a sum of Rs.3,600 was paid, which was accepted by landlord, without prejudice to his rights to get possession. Plaintiff sought eviction of tenant with damage in use and occupation after the period of tenancy. According to plaintiffs lease was composite lease i.e., building and furniture and therefore civil court got jurisdiction to entertain the same.

4