1. The defeated defendant is the appellant. The suit was for recovery of a building in the possession of the defendant as a building tenant. The Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act is not applicable to the case. The only contention which required examination was a contention based on the insufficiency and invalidity of the notice under S.106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The trial held that the quit notice issued in the case was not valid and legal and so dismissed the suit. The plaintiff filed an appeal before the District Court, Quilon. The learned District Judge allowed the appeal and decreed the suit. Now the defendant appeals.

2. Here also the only question that has to be considered by me in this appeal is in regard to the validity of the suit notice. The short factual format of the case is as follows:

Agreeing to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 20/- for a period of one year, the defendant-tenant executed a lease deed marked in the case as Ext. Al. It is dated 25-5-1979. One of the relevant terms of the lease deed is that, in case the tenant defaults payment of rent or fails to pay rent in due time without regard to the term fixed in the lease deed, the landlo