Monthly tenancy notice and rent control protection: valid quit notice expiring with tenancy month, and no bar against an ex-tenant.

A monthly tenancy is determined by fifteen days' notice expiring with the end of a tenancy month, and Section 110 of the Transfer of Property Act does not govern the expiry of notice for such a tenancy. Because the tenancy here began on the first day of a month, notice had to end with the last day of a month; the notice to quit was therefore valid. Section 13 of the Bihar House Rent Control Order, 1942 protects only a tenant or statutory tenant, not a person whose tenancy had already been validly determined and against whom an ejectment decree had been passed before the Order operated in the area. The bar to recovery of possession did not apply, and the decree for ejectment was sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the notice to quit served on a monthly tenant commencing on the first day of a month was valid under the Transfer of Property Act; (ii) whether Section 13 of the Bihar House Rent Control Order, 1942 barred recovery of possession against a person whose tenancy had already been determined and against whom a decree in ejectment had been passed.

Issue (i): whether the notice to quit served on a monthly tenant commencing on the first day of a month was valid under the Transfer of Property Act.

Analysis: A monthly tenancy is determinable by fifteen days' notice expiring with the end of a month of the tenancy. Section 110 of the Transfer of Property Act governs the expiry of a term lease, but it does not control the expiry of notice determining a monthly tenancy. Since the tenancy in question commenced on the first day of a month, the notice had to expire with the last day of a month.

Conclusion: The notice to quit was valid.

Issue (ii): whether Section 13 of the Bihar House Rent Control Order, 1942 barred recovery of possession against a person whose tenancy had already been determined and against whom a decree in ejectment had been passed.

Analysis: The word "tenant" in Section 13 was confined to a person holding under a tenancy agreement or a statutory tenant under the Order. A person whose tenancy had already been validly determined, and against whom an ejectment decree had been passed before the Order became operative in the area, could not be treated as a tenant for the purpose of the bar. Extending the provision to such an ex-tenant would produce anomalous results inconsistent with the scheme of the Order.

Conclusion: Section 13 did not bar the suit for ejectment.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on both grounds, and the decree for ejectment was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A monthly tenancy is determined by notice expiring with the end of a tenancy month, and a rent control protection for "tenants" does not extend to an ex-tenant whose tenancy has already been validly determined and reduced to an ejectment decree.

---