S.S.Sodhi, J.

1. Behind the shop of the defendant-Narinder Nath Saini in Ludhiana is a godown which belongs to the plaintiff-Prem Parkash Kaur but has been in his possession. The controversy here is whether this godown is held by the defendant as a tenant or a licencee ?

2. According to the plaintiff Parkash Kaur, she had granted a licence to the defendant Narinder Nath Saini for use of this godown for a period of two years by the licence deed Exhibit P/1 executed on January 1, 1970. In the term of this deed he was required to hand back possession of the godown on the expiry of the said period of two years and also to reconstruct the wall which he had been allowed to be removed by an earlier agreement of September 1, 1968. The licence deed also provided for payment of damage at the rate of Rs. 40/- per day, if possession was not delivered by the due date. The defendant now not having delivered possession, she sought a decree for mandatory injunction directing him to vacate the godown and to reconstruct the wall which he had removed in pursuance of the agreement of September 1, 1968.

The defendant, Narinder Nath Saini, on his part took up the plea that he was in occupation o