G. C. MATHUR, J. :- These are two second appeals arising out of two suits filed by the appellants against the respondents for their eviction from two shops numbered 278 and 279.

2. The appellants are owners of a row of shops numbered 277, 278, 279, 280 and 281 which are single storeyed. The respondents are tenants of shops Nos.278 and 279. Apparently, the tenancies were created at different times. The appellants filed the two suits out of which these two appeals arise for the eviction of the respondents from these two shops, inter alia on the ground that the respondents had made certain constructions over all the five shops without the consent of the appellants and had thereby materially altered the accommodation. In the plaint, the appellants alleged that the roofs of the two shops were not included in the tenancy of the respondents. The respondents admitted having made the constructions but pleaded that they had done so with the consent of the appellants. They further pleaded that the roofs of shops Nos.277, 280 and 281 were included in the tenancy of shop No.279. It was also denied that the constructions materially altered the accommodation.

3. Admittedly, the constructio