Singham v. Wigneswaramoorthy – sllr 1995 volume 2 page 245

In the case between Singham (Plaintiff‐Respondent) and Wigneswaramoorthy (Defendant‐Appellant), the court addressed whether a notice to quit served one day short of the statutory six-month period, due to 1984 being a leap year, was legally valid under the Rent Act and common law. It was held that strict compliance with the statutory six-month notice requirement is essential, and a deficiency of even one day renders the notice invalid. This decision reaffirmed the principle that technical defects in notices to quit cannot be overlooked when statutory periods are involved. Reliance was placed on established case law and statutory interpretation emphasizing the necessity of exact compliance for legal termination of tenancy.

Dr. Amanda Grero J. — It was determined that the notice to quit ser