SRINIVASAN, J.

1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit is for recovery of possession and for arrears of rent plus damages for use and occupation.

2. The trial Court decreed the suit, while the Appellate Court reversed it and dismissed the same. In view of the fact that we are remanding the matter to the trial Court, we do not want to express any opinion on the merits of the contentions. We would only state such facts as are necessary for the purpose of making this order of remand.

3. The basis of the claim of the plaintiff is that the defendant entered into possession as a tenant under a rent deed dated 7.3.1974. According to the plaintiff, the building in the suit property was the subject matter of the lease and the defendant has failed to pay the rent and also chosen to deny the title. The defendants contention is that the property belongs to the Government and it was a ‘Mayanam’ poramboke. It does not belong to the plaintiff. According to the defendant, ‘B’ Memos have been issued to the defendant and charges have been collected.

4. The trial Court held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover possession and granted a decree. On appeal apart from the documents alr