NAGENDRA PRASAD SINGH, P.S.SAHAY
Mohammed Indris Mian – Appellant
Versus
Doman Sah – Respondent
NAGENDRA PRASAD SINGH, J.
1. Defendant is the appellant in this second appeal. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for eviction of the appellant from a house in which the appellant was a monthly tenant at a rental of Rs. 25/-. According to the plaintiff, the defendant had agreed to pay the aforesaid amount in the first week of the month following for which the rent became due, but later he defaulted in the payment of rent, and, as such , he was liable for eviction. A notice under S. 106 of the T. P. Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) was sent by the plaintiff as the karta of the family to the defendant through registered cover, but the defendant refused to receive the same on 13-6-1969. In that notice, the plaintiff had asked the defendant to vacate the house by 30th June, 1969. When the defendant did not vacate the house in question by that date, the plaintiff filed the suit in question in the Court of learned Munsif. Arrah for eviction of defendant. The defendant appeared and his defence, inter alia, was that he was owner of a portion of the house in question, and, as such, there was no question of the house being in his possession as a tenant or the defenda
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.