In Bhojabhai v. Hayem Lamuct, it was held, that service of the notice upon the tenant's solicitor was sufficient to

Held sufficent.

maintain a suit for ejectment and for enhanced rent--22 Bom., 754.

Notice to corporation.-Where a corporation is the tenant, the notice to quit may be served on its officers.Doe. v. Woodman, 1807, 8 East, 228. Fawcett, p. 446.

The recognized secretary of a corporation is competent to be served with a notice.-Doed

Service of notice on

Secretary of a Club. Birmingham Canal W. v. Bold 11 Q. B. & D. 127. Gour, p. 552.

Notice to be given to the tenant and not to the sub-tenant.-A notice to quit given by the landlord should be given to his immediate tenant or to his assignee, &c.; in whom the term is then vested and not to a mere sub-tenant. A notice addressed to the tenant but served upon the sub-tenant upon the premises is insufficient.

The notice should be directed to the tenant, and may be delivered to his solicitor or agent. In Tanham v. Nicholson, (L. R., 5 H. L., 561) it was held by the House of Lords that service upon a person whose duty it would be to deliver

Solictor or agent failing to communicate notice to the principal.

the notice to the tenant was sufficient to sustain ejectment, although in fact the notice was never delivered to the tenant in this case the tenant was imbecile, and the notice was delivered to his daughter who lived in the house and managed it. If the notice be served upon the tenant personally, it need not be directed to him by name. The tenant on being served the notice should give a similar notice to his sub-tenant, and he will be liable to an ejectment if his sub-tenant hold over. In the absence of proof to the contrary a person who has obtained possession from a tenant will be presumed to be an assignee from the tenant,

and not as a mere sub-tenant. Where on the death of a tenant from year to year his widow remained in possession, and a notice to quit was given to her, this was held sufficient in the absence of any evidence of a probate or letters of administration granted to some other person. Where there Notice to one several are two or more joint lessees, a joint lesses.

notice to quit given even to one

of them is sufficient even by parol. Where a corporation aggregate is the tenant, and a notice to quit is necessary, it should be addressed to the corporation and not to its officers,"

Notice. By whom and

to whom.

A notice to quit may be given either by the landlord or by the

tenant or by the authorized agent of either party. The agent who, if acting generally may give the notice in his own

Agent general and special. name, but not if he is acting specially, he ought to have sufficient Notice by an agent of authority when the notice is given, an agent. a subsequent ratification is not sufficient. When notice to quit is given by a particular agent, having a limited authority only, such a notice should be given in the name of the principal or expressly on his behalf. A notice given by an agent in the name of W. and B. and others is valid as notice from W. and B: only. A notice by an agent of an agent is not generally sufficient.-Woodfall 14th Ed., p. 257.

INSUFFICIENT SERVICE.

A notice published in a news paper making it Publication of notice in highly probable that it wouldcome to the tenant's knowledge is not sufficient-Chandmal v. Baghraj, 7 Bom., 474.

new paper.

A notice on the tenant's wife off the demised premises

Service on tenant's wife off the demised premises.

is invalid. Doe Blair v, street 2 A.

&. E. 328 (331 ),

A notice to quit must designate proper time for determination of the contract. Hence

Notice must specify proper time.

a notice to quit forthwith, or "from henceforth" without referring to some distinct time would be invalid.-Goode v. Howells, 4 M. W., 199 (201).

But it would appear that a notice given by a tenant to quit "as soon as by law he might" would be by law definite and more valid.-7 Goode v. Howells authority.

And so also a notice to quit.

"At the expiration of the current year's tenancy (8) Doed Gorst v. Timottey, or at the expiration of the current year 9 (Doed Baker v. Wombwell, 2 Camp, 559,) or at the expiration of the term for which you hold the same would be sufficient.

Denial of Landlord's title prior to suit.

Notice not necessary.

The denial of landlord's title prior to filing a snit for ejectment dis

pense with the notice to quit.-Dodhu v. Madhawrao 18 Bom., 110. Uma Chand v. Vamkata 17 Mad., 218. Haidre Begam v. Nathu, 17 All., 45.

A landlord can eject a tenant during currency of the tenancy when the title of landlord is denied.--16 WAL. 162165.

Disclaimer of tenancy in written statement cause of action suit to eject.—Where the tenancy in did not legally terminate and the landlord had no cause of of action, at the date of the instition of a suit to eject the tenant, the denial of the landlord's title in the written statement in answer to the plaintiff's suit cannot entitle him to recover upon his plaint.-Madhavan Nambiar v. Atoi Nambiar, 15 Mad., 123. Mad., Law Journal Dig p. 99.

Tenant at will.-Notice to quit.-In suit for ejectment based on a lease from year to year where defendant sets up a plea of permanent tenancy but fails.

Held, that it does not constitute a denial of landlords' title, and that notice to quit is necessary.

Held also, that notice of less than a month given after the and of the fusli is insufficient.—Pranambal Achee v. Palianappa Mudalier.-Mad., Law Journal pp. 99-100.

CHAPTER VI.

Registration of Leases.

Leases how made ?-A lease of immovable property from year to year, or for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent, can be made only by a registered instrument.

All other leases of immovable property may be made either by an instrument or by oral agreement. S. 107 T. P. Act 1882.

Note. Where the property leased is situate in a cantonment in British India, the lease must be registered as if this section had applied. Registration of leases of proprety situate in Cantonments.

Section 54, paragraphs 2 and 3, and ss. 59, 107 and 123 of the T. P. Act, 1882, with resRegistration. pect to the transfer of property by

registered instrument, shall on and from, the commencement of this Act, extend to every cantonment in British India.— S. 32 (1) of Cantonment Act XIII of 1889.

The Act came into force on 1st January 1890 (Government of India Notification No. 1065, dated 20th December 1889; Gaz. of India, 21st December 1889).

In places where the T. P. Act, 1882, does not apply, and in those places which are outside cantonments, the registration of leases is governed by section 17 (d) of the Indian Registration Act, III of 1877 which is as follows:

The documents next hereinafter mentioned shall be registered, if the property to which they relate is situate in a district in which and if they have been executed on or after the date on which Act No. XVI of 1864, or Act No. XX of 1866, or Act No. VIII of 1871, or this Act, came or comes into force, that is to say: