S.P. Khare, J.

1. These two second appeals under Section 100, Civil Procedure Code one by the tenant and the other by the landlord arise out of a common judgment of the first Appellate Court.

2. The following substantial questions of law were formulated by this Court in S.A. No. 721 of 1998 at the time of admission of this appeal:-

1. Whether the appellant was entitled to deny the derivative title of the respondent No. 1 landlord in view of the fact that he had entered into a contract of sale of the suit property and had filed a suit for specific performance of contract which was not finally decided at the time of filing of the plaint as the appeal was pending?

2. Whether the ultimate decision rendered in the suit for specific performance of contract would justify the claim of the appellant that he had entered into a contract of sale of the suit property and the finding recorded therein would be res judicata in the suit as against the respondent No. 1 who derived the title from the previous owner against whom the suit for specific performance was not decided?

3. Whether, even otherwise, the denial of the derivative title would amount to disclaimer of title within the meaning of