300/ p.m. as damages for use and occupation from March 11, 1963, till possession was restored to the plaintiffs respondents.
In accordance with this finding the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court, and decreed the suit for eviction directing the appellant to pay mesne profits as herein indicated.
Appellant filed this appeal by certificate granted by the High Court under Article 133 1 a of the Constitution as it stood in 1969.
The High Court also fixed Rs.
This suit was companytested by the appellant on diverse grounds.
In reaching this companyclusion the High Court was of the opinion that the 1947 Act extended protection to a tenant of an accommodation from ejectment and the definition of the expression accommodation does number include an open site only.
Respondents preferred First Appeal Mo. 172/64 to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
A Division Bench of the High Court held that the lease was a lease of the land that is open site only and that once the original lease determined by efflux of time the appellant tenant had to vacate and handover possession of the land to the lessor or his successors along with the new companystruction without any right to claim companypensation thereof.
At the hearing of this appeal Dr. Chitaley urged that during the pendency of this appeal, appellant filed Civil Miscellaneous Petition No.
A. Desai, J. Respondents landlords, filed suit No.
56/63 against the appellant tenant for recovering possession of the building more particularly described at the foot of the plaint.
