1. The contention of the appellant is that no notice was given to the appellant terminating the tenancy. It is contended for the respondent that the terms of the tenancy were such that no notice to quit was necessary as a condition precedent for bringing a suit in ejectment. Two documents, Exs. 2 and 3, have been filed in the case. They appear to be receipts granted by the respondent to the appellant for rent for the year M.E. 1097. But it is not quite clear whether the rent paid was for the whole of 1907. If the respondent had received rent for the whole of the year 1097, he was not entitled to bring a suit in ejectment before the close of the year. In order to dispose of the case satisfactorily it is necessary that there should be finding on the question

whether Exs. 2 and 8 were granted by the Kovilakam of defendant 2 (respondent) herein, for the rent for the whole of the year 1097.

2. The District Judge will record a finding on the issue and submit the same within one month after the vacation. Both sides are allowed to adduce fresh evidence. Seven days will be allowed for filing objections.

3. [The District Judge submitted the; folio win findings.]

4. I, therefore, find th