http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: A.ARUMUGAM CHETTIYAR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SMT.LOKANAYAKAMMA & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       13/02/1996

BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) AHMAD SAGHIR S. (J)

CITATION:  JT 1996 (5)   568        1996 SCALE  (2)910

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      The appellant  was put  in possession  of the  house in dispute as  a tenant in the year 1971. The landlord mortgage the house  with the  tenant by  a deed dated April 28, 1977. The question  before the High court was whether the mortgage - deed  resulted in  an implied surrender of the appellant’s right in the house as a tenant. The trial Court and the High Court  have   concurrently  found  that  the  terms  of  the mortgage-deed  conclusively  show  that  there  was  implied surrender of  the tenant’s  rights. On the said findings the Courts below have directed the eviction of the appellant.      It is  not necessary  for us to go into the question in detail as  the principles  have been authoritatively settled by this  Court in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. Vs. Nagappa Shankarappa  Malaga   &  Ors.   (AIR  1976  1565),  Gambangi Appalaswamy Naidu  & Ors.  Vs. Bhra  Venkataramanayya  Patra (AIR 1984 SC 1728), Nand Lal & Ors. Vs Sukh Dev & Anr. Supp. SCC 87)  and in  Nemichand Vs. Onkar Lal (AIR 1991 SC 2046), The High  Court on  the basis  of the  law laid down by this Court in  the above  mentioned judgments  has  come  to  the conclusion that  the deed  of mortgage  in the  present case indicates that  there  was  surrender  of  tenancy  and  the appellant was  only a mortgagee. We do not see any ground to interfere with the concurrent findings reached by the Courts below. The Appeal is dismissed. No costs.