Skip to content


Narayana Kamti and ors. Vs. Handu Shetty - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectTenancy
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1905)15MLJ210
AppellantNarayana Kamti and ors.
RespondentHandu Shetty
Excerpt:
- - it appears to us that it was clearly not intended that the clause of forfeiture was to be merely in terrorem. 2. there is another ground on which the defendant must fail and that is that when pleading his alleged right to be relieved against the forfeiture he omitted to make any tender or to pay the money into court but on the contrary pleaded payment unsuccessfully......was to be merely in terrorem.2. there is another ground on which the defendant must fail and that is that when pleading his alleged right to be relieved against the forfeiture he omitted to make any tender or to pay the money into court but on the contrary pleaded payment unsuccessfully.3. the maxim 'he who seeks equity must do equity' applies apart from the transfer of property act.4. the appeal is allowed. the decrees are reversed. there must be a decree for the property and for rs. 26-6-8.5. [their lordships then remitted an issue for finding on the question of improvements but this is not material for this report:-ed.]
Judgment:
ORDER

1. In the instrument in the case (Exhibit A) there is a peculiar provision which does not appear in the cases cited. Here there is a covenant to pay rent on the 15th of April. No forfeiture is provided for on account of default in such payment. But it is provided that if the default continue until December, then the lease is to be forfeited. It appears to us that it was clearly not intended that the clause of forfeiture was to be merely in terrorem.

2. There is another ground on which the defendant must fail and that is that when pleading his alleged right to be relieved against the forfeiture he omitted to make any tender or to pay the money into Court but on the contrary pleaded payment unsuccessfully.

3. The maxim 'he who seeks equity must do equity' applies apart from the Transfer of Property Act.

4. The appeal is allowed. The decrees are reversed. There must be a decree for the property and for Rs. 26-6-8.

5. [Their Lordships then remitted an issue for finding on the question of improvements but this is not material for this report:-Ed.]


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //