THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY SECOND APPEAL NO.1099 OF 2009 Dated 27th November, 2009 Between: G.Govindam Naidu …Appellant And B.Varalakshmi and eight others …Respondents Counsel for the appellant : Sri T.Niranjan Reddy for Sri Kokoa Srinivasa Kumar Counsel for the respondents: Sri P.Sriraghuram The Court made the following JUDGMENT: This Second Appeal arises out of judgment dated 17.07.2009 in A.S.No.216 of 2006 on the file of II-Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, whereby he dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court. The appellant is the defendant. He is the tenant of the respondents under Ex.A1 lease deed. The period of lease was from 11.12.1995 to 30.11.1997 with a provision that by the mutual consent of the parties, the lease period may be extended. As the appellant failed to vacate the premises, the respondents filed O.S.No.987 of 1997 on the file of the Court of V-Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), Visakhapatnam, for eviction of the appellant. The said suit, after contest, was decreed by the trial Court by judgment and decree dated 11.07.2006. The said decree was confirmed in A.S.No.216 of 2006 by the learned II-Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam by his judgment dated 17.07.2009. Feeling aggrieved by the said two judgments, the appellant filed the present Second Appeal. At the hearing, Sri T.Niranjan Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that since there is a clause in the lease deed providing for extension of the lease by mutual consent, a quit notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for short “the Act”) is necessary. I do not find any merit in this submission. As rightly found by the Courts below, under Section 111 (a) of the Act, where the lease expires by efflux of time, notice under Section 106 of the Act is not required to be given. By a mere recital in the lease deed that the lease can be extended by mutual consent, the nature of the tenure of the lease does not get altered unless both parties mutually agree for renewal of lease. Therefore, I do not find any substantial question of law in this Second Appeal. The Second Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. The learned counsel for the appellant requested for granting of reasonable time for vacating the premises. Considering the fact that the suit premises is put to use for commercial purpose, three months’ time from today is granted to the appellant to vacate the premises subject to the condition that the appellant shall file an undertaking in the form of an affidavit before the trial Court within a period of two (2) weeks from today and on his depositing arrears of rent, if any, in the trial Court within the above mentioned period. In default of either of the above conditions, the respondents shall be free to execute the decree. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 27th November, 2009 vrn​