(1.) THE Appellants/Defendants 2, 3 and 5 and later, after the death of the First Appellant/Second Defendant 4 to 8 Appellants (who have been brought on record as Legal Representatives of the First Appellant/Second Defendant are the Appellants in S.A.No.635 of 1997, filed against the Judgment and Decree of the First Appellate Court, viz., the Learned Additional Sub-Judge, Mayiladuthurai, in A.S.No.14 of 1993 dated 14/11/1996 in setting aside the Judgment and Decree of the Learned District Munsif, Sirkalai in O.S.No.516 of 1980 dated 30/10/1992.
(2.) THE First Appellate Court, while passing the Judgment in A.S.No.14 of 1993 filed by the First Respondent/Appellant/Plaintiff has inter alia observed that the Defendants are not entitled to claim the benefits of the Madras City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 (amended by the Act 3 of 1992) and further observed that the First Respondent/Appellant/Plaintiff is entitled to recover possession of the suit property from the Defendants and resultantly, allowed the Appeal with costs, thereby setting aside the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court passed in O.S.No.516 of 1980 dated 30/10/1992. Further, it has also granted two months time to the Defendants to handover possession of the suit property.
(3.) AT the time of admission of the Second Appeal, this Court has formulated the following substantial questions of law for consideration:-