ORDER

1. IAs Nos. 2 and 3 are allowed. Index to be corrected within two weeks.

2. Leave granted.

3. A suit for eviction based on landlord-tenant relationship has been directed to be decreed by the High Court upholding the decree passed by the two courts below. The tenant has filed this appeal by special leave on 28-3-2003. On 2-5-2003 a limited notice was directed to be issued to the respondent on the question: Whether the notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 being invalid, the decree for eviction could not have been passed?

4. The relevant part of the notice dated 14-5-1997 issued by the respondent landlord to the appellant tenant states:

"That now my client does not want to keep you as a tenant qua the shop under reference and through this notice your tenancy is terminated from the date of issue of notice.

. .. through this notice you are called upon to ... and vacate the premises in dispute within 15 days from the date of receipt of this notice.. .,"

(emphasis supplied)

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that both the recitals contained in the notice do not have the effect of terminating the tenancy in consonance with the provision