JUDGMENT

T. Ravindran, J.—Challenge in this second appeal is made to the judgment and decree dated 26.12.2002 passed in A.S.No.33 of 2001 on the file of the Subordinate court, Chidambaram confirming the judgment and decree dated 29.06.2000 passed in O.S.No.360 of 1991 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chidambaram.

2. The second appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law.

i. Whether the Courts below erred in law in holding that Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act has not been complied with on hypertechnical grounds ?

ii. Whether the Courts below have erred in law in not relying upon the admission of the defendant in cross examination relating to tenancy ? And

iii. Whether the Courts below erred in law in rejecting Ex.A3?

3. Considering the scope of the issues involved between the parties as regards the subject matter lying in a narrow compass, it is unnecessary to dwell into the facts of the case in detail.

4. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the rankings in the trial court.

5. Suffice to state that the plaintiff has laid the suit against the defendant for recovery of possession, past rental arrears and fut