The validity of a notice to quit under S. 106, T. P. Act hinges on fulfilling the conditions of a 15-day notice expiring with the end of the tenancy month for termination of a monthly tenancy.

( 1 ) THE defendant in O. S. No. 40/1972 on the file of the I Additional Munsiff, Karwar, is the appellant and the plaintiff is the respondent in this appeal.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff brought the suit O. S. No. 40/1972 against the defendant for recovery of possession of the suit premises and arrears of rent together with future mesne profits. The suit was based on the allegations that the defendant has taken the suit premises on lease from the plaintiff agreeing to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 5/ -. The defendant has paid the rents at the rate of rs. 5/- p. m. for some time. Later he failed to pay the rent as agreed. Hench the plaintiff caused a lawyers' notice dt. 28-3-1972 to be issued to the defendant terminating his tenancy. The said notice was served on the defendant on 29-3-1972. In the said notice, the plaintiff also called upon the defendant to pay all the arrears of rent and also to deliver vacant possession of the premises in question. Since the defendant neither paid the arrears nor handed over possession of. the suit premises, the plaintiff brought the suit for the reliefs stated above.

( 3 ) THE defendant resisted the suit on several grounds. He admitted that he is a tenant under the plaintiff since 1955 and he has been paying the rent as agreed to. ' He denied having kept the rent in. arrears. He says that he is manufacturing copper vessels in his shop and also sells them and he also does smithy work in the premises. The plaintiff has accepted the rent after he issued the quit notice and thus he waived the quit notice. Besides, the quit notice is illegal and void and not binding upon him. He also pleaded that greater hardship will be caused to him if he is ousted from the suit premises. The plaintiff wants to increase the rent and so he came forward with the present suit. Finally he prayed for the dismissal of the suit on these grounds.

( 4 ) THE trial Court raised the following issues on the pleadings of the parties : 1) Whether the quit notice is legal and valid? 2) Whether the defendant proves that the plaintiff has waived the said notice? 3) Whether plaintiff proves that defendant is in arrears of rent as claimed by him? 4) Is the plaintiff entitled to possession and arrears of rent? 5) What decree or order?

( 5 ) ON appreciating the evidence adduced by the parties the trial Court held that the notice to quit is legal and valid, that the plaintiff has not waived the notice to quit issued to the defendant that there are no arrears of rent payable by the defendant and finally decreed the suit for possession and also future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 5/- per month from 1-5-1972 till the recovery of possession of the suit premises from the defendant.

( 6 ) THE defendant challenged the validity and legality of the decree passed by the trial Court in R. A. No. 113/1973 in the Court of the Civil Judge, North Kanara at Karwar. The learned Civil judge formulated the following points for decision in the appeal. 1) Whether the notice to quit issued by the plaintiff is legal and valid? 2) Whether the decree for future mesne profits is tenable ?

( 7 ) AFTER hearing the counsel appearing for both the parties, the learned Civil Judge recorded a finding in favour of the plaintiff that the suit notice terminating the tenancy of the defendant is legal and valid. However as regards the decree for the payment of future mesne profits from the date of institution of the suit rill recovery of possession of the suit premises will have to be determined by a separate enquiry under 0. 20, R. 12 (l) (c), Civil P. C. Finally he dismissed the appeal with the modification in respect of the decree for future mesne profits as indicated above as per his judgment and decree dt. 18-7-1975. Hence this second appeal by defendant.

( 8 ) SRI V. P. Kulkarni learned Advocate appearing for the defendant canvassed before me the sole question for consideration that the suit notice is not valid and legal. Although I do not find much force in the plea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document