A S GNANAPRAKASAM PILLAI Vs. FSVAZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question raised is an important one and relates to the sufficiency of a notice to quit. The plaintiff's counsel tells me that, although in the ordinary course he would have filed this suit in the City Civil Court, he has. chosen this forum anticipating that the defendant would raise the point he has now done. The terms of the lease are set forth in a writing, dated the 1 of December, 1924. It says: The landlord lets and the tenant takes the dwelling-house from the 1st of December, 1924 to the 1 of January, 1925, and thereafter unless and until the tenancy should be determined by a notice as hereinafter provided.

(2.) The only other paragraph which is relevant reads thus: The tenancy may be determined by either party giving to the other of them subsequent to the 1 January, 1925, fifteen days notice in writing expiring with the calendar month.

(3.) This agreement has not been registered and the first question that arises is whether it is admissible in evidence. Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act provides; A lease of immoveable property from year to year, or for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent, can be made only by a registered instrument. All other leases of immoveablc property may be made either by a registered instrument or by oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession.