Wakilii

Meralli and Company Limited v Parker, Togossoff and Company Limited (Civil Suit No. 1542 of 1953)

East African Court of Appeal · [1956] EACA 19 · 1956 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for unpaid rent arising from a sublease dispute
Decision
Judgment for plaintiff with costs and interest

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Held: a sublease created in breach of a Crown lease condition requiring the Governor's permission is valid between the parties until forfeiture by the Crown; an oral agreement for sublease coupled with possession creates a tenancy for one year continuing as a monthly tenancy under the Transfer of Property Act; acceptance of lower rent payments does not estop a landlord from claiming the agreed rent where no representation was made accepting the lower rate; the landlord's notice to quit was waived by subsequent conduct.

Outcome

Judgment for plaintiff with costs and interest

Facts

Plaintiff held a Crown lease of land subject to a condition prohibiting subletting without the Governor's written permission. Plaintiff and defendant verbally agreed to sublet the premises for two years at £60 per month from 1 November 1951. Defendant paid six months' rent in advance and took possession. The Commissioner of Lands refused permission unless rent did not exceed £500 per year. Plaintiff refused to accept less than £60 per month. Defendant remained in possession and tendered cheques for rent at the rate of £500 per year up to 31 March 1953. Plaintiff accepted the cheques but refused to agree to any rent below £60 per month. Plaintiff served notice to quit expiring 3 December 1952, but defendant remained. Following renewed applications, the Commissioner granted permission for a sublease at £60 per month from 1 April 1953. Defendant paid rent at £60 per month from April to August 1953 and vacated on 4 September 1953. Plaintiff sued for rent arrears at £60 per month from 1 November 1951.

Issues

  1. Whether a sublease created in breach of a Crown lease condition requiring the Governor's written permission is valid and enforceable between the parties.
  2. Whether an unregistered oral agreement for a sublease, coupled with delivery of possession, creates an enforceable tenancy under sections 106, 107 and 116 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882.
  3. Whether the plaintiff waived its notice to quit by subsequently applying for consent to the sublease.
  4. Whether acceptance of cheques for rent at a lower rate estopped the plaintiff from claiming rent at the originally agreed rate.

Orders

  • Judgment for plaintiff.
  • Defendant to pay rent arrears of Sh. 12,373.28 being the balance due at the rate of £60 per month from 1 November 1951 to 4 September 1953.
  • Costs awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Interest awarded as prayed.

Rules and key headnotes

Crown Leases — Subletting Restrictions — Effect of Breach of Condition Requiring Governor's Permission
A condition in a Crown lease requiring the Governor's written permission for subletting does not invalidate a sublease created in breach of the condition as between the parties to the sublease. The sublease remains valid and enforceable until the Crown proceeds to forfeit the head lease.
Landlord and Tenant — Conditions Against Assignment — Distinction from Limitations
A covenant or condition restraining assignment or subletting, whether created by condition or covenant, does not render an assignment or sublease void. Such an assignment or sublease is effectual to vest the term in the assignee or subtenant, but the lessor may treat the breach as a cause of forfeiture if accompanied by a proviso for re-entry. Until forfeiture is exercised, the sublease remains valid between the parties.
Leases — Oral Agreements — Effect Under Transfer of Property Act
Where there is an oral agreement for a lease exceeding one year, coupled with delivery of possession, sections 106, 107 and 116 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882 operate to create a tenancy for one year in the first instance, continuing thereafter as a monthly tenancy where the property is not used for agricultural or manufacturing purposes. Registration is not required for such a tenancy.
Crown Lands Ordinance — Registration Requirements — Exemption for Short Tenancies
Section 126 of the Crown Lands Ordinance does not require registration of a letting for one year only or for any term not exceeding one year. An oral agreement creating such a tenancy, coupled with possession, is enforceable without registration.
Landlord and Tenant — Notice to Quit — Waiver by Conduct
A landlord's notice to quit is waived where, after the expiry date, the landlord applies for consent to a sublease at the tenant's suggestion, the tenant remains in possession claiming to be a tenant, and the landlord accepts the tenant's continued occupation. Such conduct constitutes a waiver of the notice.
Estoppel — Acceptance of Payment — Requirements for Estoppel
Mere acceptance of cheques tendered as rent at a lower rate than that agreed does not estop a landlord from claiming the balance at the agreed rate where the landlord never represented that it accepted the lower rate as the proper rent, never issued receipts, and consistently refused to agree to any rent below the agreed amount.

Legislation cited (7)

  • Transfer of Property Act 1882 s.106
  • Transfer of Property Act 1882 s.107
  • Transfer of Property Act 1882 s.116
  • Crown Lands Ordinance s.7
  • Crown Lands Ordinance s.126
  • Crown Lands Ordinance s.127
  • Crown Lands Ordinance s.129

Cases cited (1)

  • Jagat Singh v Ishmael Mohamed Chogley (Court of Appeal 1949) 16 EACA 27

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Meralli and Company Limited v Parker, Togossoff and Company Limited (Civil Suit No. 1542 of 1953) [1956] EACA 19 (1 January 1956)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.