GOVIND Vs. ROOPCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, under S.50 of the Mysore Rent Control Act, 1961, is by the landlord. It is directed against an Order made by the District Judge, Bidar, in CMA.11/1966 whereby he affirmed the order made by the Munsiff, Bidar, in CS.No.155/1 of 1966. By the said Order, the learned Munsiff refused to grant a decree for eviction in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) The petition was filed on the ground set out in Sec.21(1) (h) of the Rent Control Act. The premises in question is a commercial one. The orignial lease was from year to year, i.e., from Deepavali to Deepavali, on an annual rent of Rs.200. It would appear that the term stipulated at the commencement of the tenancy was one year. Before the end of the first year of the tenancy, the landlord is purported to have issued a notice terminating the tenancy two days prior to the succeeding Deepavali. It is conceded that only 25 days' time had been allowed to the tenant to so vacate. He however, filed the petition soon thereafter.

(3.) On behalf of the tenant, it was contended that the notice to quit was invalid and that the requirement of the landlord was neither reasonable nor bona fide. The trial Court, however, proceeded to frame only one issue relative to the question of reasonableness and bona fides. However, in the course of the trial and the arguments, the question of notice to quit was pressed on behalf of the tenant.