ABBAKKA SHETTHI (DIED) Vs. SESHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It was held by this Court in a case, Karapalu v. Narayana 20 Ind. Cas 930 : 25 M.L.J. 315 : (1913) M.W.N. 655, that as the Transfer of Property Act does not in terms apply to agricultural leases no overt act need be proved by the landlord to entitle him to succeed in a suit to eject based on an alleged forfeiture by denial of title. Assuming this to be so there is in this case no setting up. the title of a third person against his landlord such as would entail a forfeiture.

(2.) All that the tenants did was, when the 4th defendant in this suit brought a suit against them in respect of items 1 to 8, to compromise the suit after first denying the 4th defendant s title under the mistaken impression that the title was in him. They have never refused to pay the rent due or set up the title of the 4th defendant against the plaintiffs until after the suit was filed. There was, therefore, no cause of action on which the plaintiff could sue and in fact he alleged an entirely different cause of forfeiture, that is non-payment of rent which was found against. In this view the suit was rightly dismissed by the lower Appellate Court.

(3.) The second appeal is dismissed with costs. Sadasiva Aiyar, J.