9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of eviction order based on arrears of rent. 2. Requirement of notice to quit under S. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act for eviction. 3. Determination of tenancy by setting up title in oneself. Analysis: Issue 1: The tenant filed a petition under S. 26 of the Hyderabad Houses (Rent, Eviction and Lease) Control Act, challenging an eviction order by the District Judge. The landlord claimed arrears of rent as grounds for eviction. The District Judge found the tenancy established and ordered eviction, a finding not contested by the tenant before the High Court. Issue 2: The tenant contended that a notice to quit under S. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was necessary for the eviction petition to be maintainable. The tenant raised this objection belatedly, but the High Court allowed it citing precedents. The Court referred to decisions emphasizing the importance of a proper notice to quit for the termination of a lease. Issue 3: The landlord argued that the tenant's denial of their title led to the termination of the lease under S. 111(g) of the T. P. Act. However, the High Court clarified that mere denial of title does not automatically end the lease. The Court highlighted the requirement of a notice under S. 111(g) for forfeiture to be effective, rejecting this argument. The High Court ultimately dismissed the original eviction application, emphasizing the necessity of proper legal procedures for eviction. No costs were awarded, and the petition was allowed.
|
