Back
1987 Supreme(SC) 1033
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.P. Sen and Sabyasachi Mukherji, JJ.
Addepalli Subba Rao - Petitioner
Versus
Yerrabotula Krishnamjrthy and Ors. - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 0 of 1987 (Arising Out of SLP No. 13186 of 1986).
Decided On : 02-03-1987
Headnote:
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Section 106 – Construction – Requirement - After hearing Learned Counsel for parties we find it difficult to sustain judgment of High Court holding notice to defective notice - It failed to appreciate that notice on a reasonable construction was a sufficient notice in compliance with requirements and therefore contract of tenancy came to an end - Held, High Court was unduly technical in construing notice as not expiring with end of month of tenancy within meaning - Appeal must therefore succeed and is allowed judgment and decree passed by High Court are reversed and those of learned District Judge decreeing Plaintiffs suit are restored - Appeal allowed.
ORDER :
Special leave granted. Arguments heard.
2. After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties, we find it difficult to sustain the judgment of the High Court holding the notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 to be a defective notice. It failed to appreciate that the notice on a reasonable construction was a sufficient notice in compliance with the requirements of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and therefore the contract of tenancy came to an end. The High Court was unduly technical in construing the notice as not expiring with the end of the month of tenancy within the meaning of Section 106 of the Act.
3. The appeal must therefore succeed and is allowed. The judgment and decree passed by the High Court are reversed and those of the learned District Judge decreeing the Plaintiff's suit are restored. No costs.
Appeal allowed.
