MOIDEEN SAIBA Vs. GOPALA KUDWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The principal appellants are tenants under a mulgeni lease obtained from the predecessors-in-title of the respondents, and the question that falls to be decided is whether there has been such a forfeiture of the lease as is referred to in the Transfer of Property Act, Section 111(g).

(2.) The forfeiture is claimed by reason of a breach of a covenant in the lease, which may be translated in the following terms: "If I fail to conduct myself accordingly, I shall at once give up the raid land to you and I shall have no objection to your giving it away to others." It is argued in the first instance that this covenant must be read as referring to a breach only of the covenant to pay rent. We are unable to accept this construction of the lease. Reading the clause with the rest of the lease, we are of opinion that it was meant to come into operation on the tenants failing to act in accordance with any of the covenants contained in the lease.

(3.) The covenant which the tenants are alleged to have failed to observe is that they shall not alienate the land in any manner.