{"issue_text":"Whether the leases continued by tacit relocation after expiry","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Continued occupation and rent acceptance after lease expiry"}
{"issue_text":"Whether appellants were liable for arrear rentals as claimed","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Payment history and amounts claimed"}
{"issue_text":"Whether eviction should be granted","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Expiry of leases, notice given"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Appellants occupied houses owned by respondent under lease agreements that had expired. Respondent sought eviction and payment of arrear rentals. Magistrate granted eviction. Appellants appealed claiming tacit relocation of leases and disputing arrear rental amounts.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases