K. M. Dayal, J.

1. The present Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiff. A suit for injunction has been dismissed by the lower appellate court.

2. The plaintiff filed a suit for injunction against Nagar Mahapalika Kanpur claiming that he was lessee of the disputed land and Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur was trying to evict him by force. The defence was that the plaintiff was not a lessee but was a licenseee of the land in dispute and his licence having been revoked, he was liable to be evicted by force. The trial court decreed the suit for limited injunction that the plaintiff would not be evicted from the disputed place except in accordance with law. The lower appellate court has, however, set aside that decree and dismissed the suit.

The concurrent finding of both the courts below is that the plaintiff was occupying the place under permit issued in his favour from time to time. It has also been found that this permit expired in 1966 and therefore, he was liable to be evicted from the said place. Both the courts below have concurrently held that the plaintiff was a licensee and not a lessee and had no interest in the land. Learned counsel for the appellant has tried to argu