M/S Nopany Investments (P) Ltd vs Santokh Singh (Huf) on 10 December, 2007
Now the matter comes as to whether the tenancy of the defendant has been
terminated or not ? To prove it, the plaintiff has proved two legal notices on record
which are Ex. PW1/25 and Ex. PW1/28 and admitted and replied documents of the
defendant. Vide Ex. DW1/4 and DW1/5. These legal notices are proving intention
of the plaintiff that the plaintiff was not interested in keeping the defendant her
tenant any more and she was willing to terminate the tenancy of the defendant.
Though in first legal notice Ex. PW1/25 no specific word of termination of
tenancy has been mentioned, yet Ex. PW1/28 is explaining this fact that the
previous notice was intended to terminate the tenancy of the defendant. By the
clarifications of Ex. PW1/28, it is clear that the tenancy of the defendant has been
terminated by these notices. Even otherwise it has been held by the Hon.
Supreme Court of India in 146 (2008) DLT 217 (SC) titled No Pany Investment
(P) Ltd. Vs. Santokh Singh (HUF) that filing of eviction suit is itself a notice to
quit on tenant. After the termination of the tenancy, the defendant is liable to
vacate the premises and the plaintiff will be entitled for the possession.