VENKATACHALAPATHY ODAYAR Vs. RAJALAKSHMI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant in O.S.No. 380 of 1973 on the file of the District Munsif of Valangiman at Kumbakonam is the appellant in this second appeal.

(2.) THE said suit was filed by the respondent herein for recovery of possession of the suit properties on the ground that the defendants took on lease the right to collect the usufructs from 135 coconut trees for the period 1st April, 1969 to 31st March, 1970 for a sum of Rs. 600 and that after the expiry of the said period, the defendant has not surrendered possession of the coconut tope even after the issue of a notice dated 21st February, 1973 calling upon the defendant to deliver possession of the thope.

(3.) ON the above pleadings, the trial Court held that the defendant is not a cultivating tenant of the suit land, but that his lease has not been properly terminated and, therefore, the suit for possession cannot be maintained. In this view, the suit: was dismissed. ON appeal, the lower appellate Court held that as section 106 of the Act will not apply to agricultural leases in view of section 117 of the Act, the plaintiff is entitled to seek possession even though a proper notice had not been issued in this case terminating the lease under section 106 of the Act. In this view, the trial Court's decree and judgment were reversed and the plaintiff was granted a decree for possession with future mense profits from the date of plaint till the date of delivery of possession.