High CourtsDivision Bench(1954) 03 KL CK 0014

(sic)Chottalal Othamchand vs Arakka(Sic)mbil Padmanabha Shenoi

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 2 March 1954 · Citation: AIR 1954 Ker 467

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.T. Koshi, C.J · M.S. Menon, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
(SIC) Second Appeal No. 103 of 1124 (c)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 392 words

M.S. Menon, J.—This is an appeal by the Plaintiff in O.S. No. 16 of 1121 of the District Court of Anjikaimal. He is the owner of an item of property in Mattancherry and the Defendant is his lessee. The lower court has held that there has been no proper notice of termination and negatived the Plaintiff''s prayer for recovery of possession.

2.

We propose to assume, without deciding, that the Plaintiff is right when he says that the tenancy concerned is a tenancy from month to month commencing on the first of each month reckoned according to the English Calendar. On that basis the notice required u/s 106, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, is:

fifteen days'' notice expiring with the end of a month of the tenancy

and the only question for decision will be whether Ext AG dated 15-8-1945 amounts to a proper notice of termination or not.

3.

The relevant portion of Ext AG reads as follows:

...this is to give you notice...that I terminate your tenancy with effect from the last day of August 1945. I hereby demand of you the surrender of the buildings and premises on the said date for which purpose I shall be present at the premises between 4 and 5 P.M. on 31-8-1945.

It is common ground that if Ext. AG amounts to a termination of the tenancy with effect from the midnight of 31-8-1945 the notice is proper. The Plaintiff''s contention is that it is such a notice and the Defendant''s that it is not. The words "I terminate your tenancy with effect from the last day of August 1945" read with the concluding sentence of the notice "I hereby demand of you the surrender of the buildings and premises on the said date for which purpose I shall be present at the premises between 4 and 5 P.M." make it quite clear that the termination intended was not at midnight on 31-8-1945 but at least (latest?) by 5 P.M. on the said date.

4.

It follows that Ext. AG does not amount to fifteen days'' notice "expiring with the end of a month of the tenancy" - which for August 1945 will be at midnight on 31-8-1945 - and that this appeal must fail. We dismiss the appeal but in the circumstances of the case, however, without any order as to costs.