for its determination. a. Is the suit maintainable in law? b. Is the suit property correctly described? c. Is the order passed in Resumption Case No.6/75 illegal, void and without jurisdiction? 6d. Are the plaintiffs entitled to renewal of the lease? e. Are the plaintiffs entitled to a decree of permanent injunction? f. To what relief are the plaintiffs entitled? 10. The Trial Court after analysing the facts and evaluating the evidence tendered by both parties, dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs by arriving at a conclusion that plaintiffs had not applied for the renewal of the lease within three months before the expiry of the lease period; that the plaintiffs had not kept the building in proper repair; and all the lessees had not applied for the renewal of the lease except Nalininath Mitra. FINDINGS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE COURT 11. Against the dismissal of the suit, the plaintiffs filed an appeal before the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Puri in Title Appeal No.2/100 of 1992/1991.