ROSHANLAL Vs. KAILASH PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second appeal before me is by a tenant and raises two questions: (1)regarding the waiver of a notice for termination of tenancy and the consequent subsistence of the contractual tenancy; and (2) about the bona fide personal necessity of the landlord to get possession of the premises.

(2.) KAILASH Prasad, plaintiff-respondent, brought a suit for ejectment against the defendant-tenant on the basis of personal necessity and default in payment of rent. The landlord had served a notice for the termination of the tenancy on 23-41967 intimating the tenant that the tenancy shall stand terminated from 31-51967, apart from this it was averred by the landlord that the defendant-tenant had not paid him rent for the period 1-7-1967 to 31-1-1968 and he was therefore, liable to be evicted on this ground as well. The receipt of notice for termination of the tenancy was admitted by the defendant-tenant, but he contended that the notice had been waived by the landlord by his accepting the rent for the period subsequent to the notice for termination of tenancy. It was averred by him that he had paid the rent and he produced a receipt Ex. A/3 for the payment of rent. He further stated that he had remitted the rent to the landlord by money orders, but the landlord had declined to accept the same and for that he produced two money order coupons Ex. A/1 and Ex. A/2.

(3.) THE learned Additional Munsif No, 2 Dholpur, before whom the suit was filed, framed the following issues :--