LAWS(KER)-1954-6-5

NARAYANAN Vs. GOVINDA MENON

Decided On June 25, 1954
NARAYANAN Appellant
V/S
GOVINDA MENON Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 3rd defendant in O.S. No. 284 of 1123 of the Court of the District Munsiff of Irinjalakuda, an assignee of the verumpattom rights under an oral lease, is the appellant in this second appeal. The first respondent is the plaintiff in the suit who sought eviction under the provisions of S.8(1)(f) of the Cochin Verumpattomdars Act, 1118, on the strength of a melpattom deed of 1116, Ext. A, granted to him by the jenmi of the property concerned. The courts below have concurrently held that the requirements of sub-s. (1)(f) of S.8 of the Cochin Verumpattomdars Act, 1118, have been satisfied and directed the surrender of the holding.

(2.) The relevant portion of S.8(1) of the Cochin Verumpattomdars Act, 1118, reads as follows:-

(3.) Contention No. (1) The controversy till now has been whether the words "requires the holding bona fide" meant a genuine desire on the part of the jenmi or an actual necessity under which he laboured. Under S.20(5) of the Malabar Tenancy Act, 1939, prior to the amendment effected by the Malabar Tenancy (Second Amendment) Act, 1945, a landlord was entitled to eviction if he required the holding bona fide for his own cultivation. The question as to whether the words "requires the holding bona fide" meant that the jenmi may resume occupation if there was a genuine intention to cultivate or whether he should show a real need to do so came up for consideration in AIR 1942 Mad. 242 Narikkal Chathan v. Kesavan Namboodiri. Leach, C.J., quoted with approval the following passage from an unreported judgment of King, J.