HORWILL, RAJAGOPALAN
R. Krishnamurthy – Appellant
Versus
S. Parthasarathy – Respondent
Horwill, J.-The respondent is the occupier of the house No.403, Mint Street, Madras, and the appellant is the owner of that house, who had leased it to the respondent on a month to month tenancy. The respondent failed to pay rent for July, 1947, before the end of August of that year; and so the appellant, without giving notice under section 111(h) of the Transfer of Property Act, filed an application before the Rent Controller, Madras, under section 7 of Madras Act XV of 1946 for the eviction of the respondent. The Rent Controller, after giving notice to the respondent, came to the conclusion that the respondent had not paid his rent within the time allowed by section 7(2) and so ordered his eviction. The question of the non-issue of notice under section 111(h) of the Transfer of Property Act was not raised. The respondent exercised his statutory right of appeal under section 12 of the Act and filed an appeal in the Court of Small Causes, Madras. Again no reference was made to the failure of the appellant to give notice to quit. The appeal was dismissed. The respondent thereupon filed C.S.No.342 of 1948 in this Court for a declaration that the order of the Rent Controller w
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.