(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to eject the defendant from a house on the allegation that the defendant is a tenant-at-will only and that as he refuses to pay enhanced rent the plaintiff is entitled to eject him.
(2.) The defendant claims that the land in suit was let to his predecessors 60 or more years ago to build upon, on the understanding that the lease would be a permanent one.
(3.) Both the lower Courts have dismissed the suit. It has been found that there was an enclosure (ahata) in Cawnpore which belonged to the predecessor of the plaintiff. This enclosure was let out to tenants for building purposes on, small rent. This fact is practically admitted in the second paragraph of the plaint.