Mansoor v. Umma – sllr 1984 volume 1 page 151

In the case between the plaintiff/respondent (landlord) and the defendant/1st defendant-appellant (tenant), the court considered whether a notice to quit is necessary when the tenant expressly denies the contract of tenancy. The holding established that where a tenant repudiates the tenancy by denying its existence, the requirement to serve notice to quit is dispensed with. The case reaffirmed the principle that a denial of tenancy by the occupant effectively terminates the contractual relationship and relieves the landlord of the obligation to serve such notice. Reliance was placed upon authorities including Pieris v. Fernando, Muttu Natchia v. Patuma Natchia, Edirisinghe v. Patel, Sundra Ammal v. Jusey Appu, Pedrick v. Mendis, and Hassan v. Nagaria. The decision clarified that the statut