CHIDDA RAM Vs. NARU MAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGEMENT This is an appeal by the defendant against whom a decree for ejectment from a house situate in the city of Agra and for recovery of arrears of rent has been passed. The only point which calls for determination in this appeal is whether the so-called notice to quit or termination of tenancy sent by the plaintiff-respondents, the landlord, and served upon the defendant-appellant, the tenant, was valid and effective within the meaning of S. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. It may be mentioned that the findings of fact recorded against the defendant-appellant on the question of the arrears due, the amount of arrears due and the default in complying with the notice calling upon him to pay up the arrears have not been challenged in this second appeal. It is clear, therefore, that if the appellant succeeds in establishing that the notice was not an effective notice under S. 106, the only consequence would be that the suit of the plaintiffs as far as the ejectment of the defendant is concerned, would stand dismissed and the decree of the Court below would be modified to that extent only.

(2.) IN order to appreciate the submissions made at the Bar in regard to the validity of the notice as an effective notice under S. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, it is necessary to reproduce the notice, a copy of which is paper No. 18-C on the record having been admitted in evidence duly proved as a true copy of the original notice sent to the defendant by the plaintiffs :

(3.) THE result is that this appeal partly succeeds. The decree of the Court below is modified to the extent that the suit of the plaintiffs as far as the relief for ejectment of the defendant is concerned will stand dismissed. The decree for mesne profits is also set aside. The rest of the decree shall stand. The parties are directed to bear their own costs for this appeal. Order accordingly.