(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 15-9-2005 and 29-9-2005 respectively passed by the learned District Judge, Cuttack in rfa No. 132 of 2004 confirming the judgment dated 21 -9-2004 passed by the learned civil Judge (Junior Division), Second Court, cuttack in Title Suit No. 164 of 2001.
(2.) THE present respondent, as plalntiff, filed the above noted suit for eviction of the present appellant from the suit house and for recovery of arrear rent. The plaintiffs case in essence is that the defendant was inducted as a tenant in the suit house as monthly tenant on the basis of the agreement dated 24-4-1969, but even after ex-piry of the period of tenancy contemplated in the agreement, defendant did not give vacant possession of the house for which a notice wilder Section 106 of the T. P. Act was served and the suit for eviction and arrear rent was filed. Defendant in his written statement took the plea that the lease agreement dated 24-4-1969 was for a period of 60 years and accordingly, he is running a mill on the premises and therefore, the period of lease has not expired. He took a further plea that statutory notice under Section 106 of the t. P. Act was not served on him and therefore, the suit for eviction was not maintainable. The learned trial Court framed four issues and on consideration of the evidence produced by the parties, came to hold that the period of tenancy as per the agreement was for 10 years and the said period has expired, that the notice under Section 106 of the T. P. Act was served on the defendant and accordingly decreed the suit for the plalntiff. The defendant challenging the said judgment and decree carried the matter before the learned District Judge, Cuttack in the above noted appeal. The said appeal having been dismissed and the findings of the learned trial Court having been confirmed, the present appeal has been filed.
(3.) THE following substantial questions of law were formulated for consideration in this appeal.