Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for the purpose of Sections 12(2) and 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act, the tenant could treat the period of one month after notice as expiring at the end of the next calendar month rather than on the corresponding day of the following month.
Analysis: Section 3(30) of the Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904 defines a month as a month reckoned according to the British calendar. On that basis, a month is not a fixed period of thirty days, but the period from a given date in one month to the corresponding date in the next month. The phrase used in Section 12(2), namely "expiration of one month next after notice," and the phrase in Section 12(3)(a), namely "expiration of period of one month after notice," both refer to the same monthly period calculated after excluding the day on which notice is received. The word "next" does not mean the end of the calendar month in which notice was served. Support for this construction was drawn from analogous statutory provisions governing notice periods and computation of time.
Conclusion: The tenant was required to make payment by the corresponding day of the next month after receipt of notice, and payment made after that date did not save her from eviction under Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act.