Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
PETITIONER:
A.ARUMUGAM CHETTIYAR.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SMT.LOKANAYAKAMMA & ANR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/02/1996
BENCH:
KULDIP SINGH (J)
BENCH:
KULDIP SINGH (J)
AHMAD SAGHIR S. (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (5) 568 1996 SCALE (2)910
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
The appellant was put in possession of the house in
dispute as a tenant in the year 1971. The landlord mortgage
the house with the tenant by a deed dated April 28, 1977.
The question before the High court was whether the mortgage
- deed resulted in an implied surrender of the appellant’s
right in the house as a tenant. The trial Court and the High
Court have concurrently found that the terms of the
mortgage-deed conclusively show that there was implied
surrender of the tenant’s rights. On the said findings the
Courts below have directed the eviction of the appellant.
It is not necessary for us to go into the question in
detail as the principles have been authoritatively settled
by this Court in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. Vs. Nagappa
Shankarappa Malaga & Ors. (AIR 1976 1565), Gambangi
Appalaswamy Naidu & Ors. Vs. Bhra Venkataramanayya Patra
(AIR 1984 SC 1728), Nand Lal & Ors. Vs Sukh Dev & Anr. Supp.
SCC 87) and in Nemichand Vs. Onkar Lal (AIR 1991 SC 2046),
The High Court on the basis of the law laid down by this
Court in the above mentioned judgments has come to the
conclusion that the deed of mortgage in the present case
indicates that there was surrender of tenancy and the
appellant was only a mortgagee. We do not see any ground to
interfere with the concurrent findings reached by the Courts
below.
The Appeal is dismissed. No costs.