1. The first respondent in both the second appeal filed the suits in O.S.Nos.390 of 391 of 1994 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruthuraipoondi against the appellant and the second respondent for recovery of possession and for damages for use and occupation of the suit properties. Under the registered lease deed dated 24.4.1947 the site was leased out to the then Burmah Shell Company to run their retail outlet. Similarly, with respect to another portion of the land a separate lease arrangement was entered into by the said company on 9.3.1951 by a registered document. According to the plaintiff/first respondent, the period of lease was fixed till 14.3.1977. The appellant/first defendant had become the successor-in-interest of the said Burmah Shell Company and had duly attorned to the plaintiff the said leases and they have been paying the rent. The plaintiff in the year 1991 requested the appellant to give vacant possession of the property. The appellant took a stand in the reply dated 8.3.1991 that it is having a right of renewal for similar period. But the said right was never acted upon. So a notice was caused through his Advocate on 21.3.1994 which was replie