SIRI RAM Vs. PRITAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a tenant's second appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment.

(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit alleging that the premises mentioned in the plaint were let out to the defendant on a monthly rent of Rs. 18.00 per mensem in the year 1973. On April 16, 1973, the landlord served a notice on the tenant requiring him to vacate the premises. Because of his refusal to leave, the plaintiff filed the suit. The suit was resisted by the defendant on the ground, inter alia, that the notice terminating his tenancy was invalid. The trial court decreed the suit, and an appeal by the defendant has been dismissed by the learned District Judge. And now this second appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the notice terminating the tenancy is invalid because the provisions of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act require that the notice period should terminate with the month of the tenancy, and in this case, it is said, the tenancy month closed on the 8th May 1973 while the notice allowed the appellant time up-to 9th May, 1973. In my judgment, the appeal must be dismissed, but while doing so I must record that learned counsel for the appellant very fairly placed all the cases on the point before me.