The plaintiff in O.S.No.399 of 1981 on the file of the Court of District Munsif. Thirumangalam, who is no more and whose legal representatives are pursuing this appeal, had filed the above appeal against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.202 of 1983, whereunder the learned first appellate Judge has chosen to reverse the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Judge and dismissed the suit filed for a decree to direct the defendant to vacate and hand over possession of the suit property after removing all the superstructures therein within the time stipulated and for a mandatory injunction also for the removal of the superstructures put up by him.

.2. The plaintiff is the owner of the suit property and even according to the averments in the plaint, it has been admittedly let out to the defendant for the purpose of running a saw-mill. The plaintiff claimed that the tenancy is as per the English calendar month, the monthly rent being Rs.125 to be paid on or before the 5th of every succeeding English month. The liability is on the defendant to bear the electricity charges. It appears that incorporating all the terms agreed to between the parties, a rent agreement was