You are on page 1of 2


Serial Case title and citation

1. V. Dhanapal Chettiar Vs Yesodai Ammal The Court on considering the
(1979) 4 SCC 214 requirement of notice in order to
determine a lease under Section
106 of Transfer Of Property Act,
1882 had in majority held that a
notice to quit under Section 106 of
the Act is not necessary and such a
notice is on a mere surplusage.
Further emphasised the
requirement for a uniform law
regarding the requirement of notice
in order to evict a tenant under all
the state Acts and overruled all the
contrary views that was been
Relevant para. 19
2. N. Janakiraman Vs. C.B. Radhakrishnan The Court specifically held that no
2001-3-L.W.792 notice is required under section 10
of T.N Lease and Rent Control Act.
Relevant Para. 12

3. M.K. Mukuthan Vs. Pasupathi When the amount paid in advance

(2001) 6 SCC 13 does not cover the sum by which
the tenant is in arrears such tenant
must be considered to be in
Relevant para. 9
4. Sulochana Vs. R. Pangajam and others Atonement of tenancy thus not
2012 (4) TNLJ 318 (Civil ) arise the tenant has admitted the
tenancy. Then the tenant will have
to pay the rent and failure on the
part of the tenant to pay the rent
will amount wilful default.
Relevant Para. 11
5. Nagamal Vs. Boomi and another Depositing of arrears of rent in the
2002-4-L.W.150 court on the first hearing date
cannot be accepted as a universal
rule that the tenant should be
absolved from the ground of wilful
default. It depends upon the bone
fide explanation given by the
tenant for his failure to pay the
Relevant Para. 10
6. N. Sundaresan Vs S. Chandrasekaran Payment of rent by tenant in
2012 (4) TNLJ 335 (Civil) lumpsum would amount to willful
Relevant Para. 10
7. H.J. Siwani and ano. Vs. Ugma Bhai There is no duty cast upon the
2007 (5) CTC 254 landlord in order to raise the man
for the rent that is payable by the
tenant for each month.
Relevant Para. 10