Ragmohan Singh Chug & Anor v Mohinderpal Singh Dhaliwal & Anor

Ragmohan Singh Chug & Anor v Mohinderpal Singh Dhaliwal & Anor

The appeal was dismissed because the tenant had agreed to relinquish all interest in the property in exchange for the landlord not pursuing dilapidations, thereby settling any complaint about the lawfulness of re-entry or the validity of the section 146 notice. The breach of the alienation covenant was a continuing breach, not waived by acceptance of rent. The section 146 notice was sufficiently clear to a reasonable recipient. The judge's refusal to grant relief from forfeiture was justified as the tenant had no remaining interest to protect.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mr Ragmohan Singh Chug; Appellant/claimant: The Essentials Homewares Limited; Respondent/defendant: Mr Mohinderpal Singh Dhaliwal; Respondent/defendant: Mrs Bhajan Kaur Dhaliwal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Forfeiture of Lease, Waiver of Right to Forfeit, Section 146 Notice, Relief From Forfeiture, Breach of Covenant Against Alienation
Landlord and Tenant Property Law Forfeiture of Lease Waiver of Right to Forfeit Section 146 Notice Relief From Forfeiture Breach of Covenant Against Alienation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Ragmohan Singh Chug

Appellant/claimant

The Essentials Homewares Limited

Appellant/claimant

Mr Mohinderpal Singh Dhaliwal

Respondent/defendant

Mrs Bhajan Kaur Dhaliwal

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the right to forfeit the lease for breach of the alienation covenant was waived by acceptance of rent after knowledge of the breach
  2. 2 Whether the section 146 notice was valid and sufficiently specified the breach and remedy required
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in exercising discretion to refuse relief from forfeiture

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the tenant had agreed to relinquish all interest in the property in exchange for the landlord not pursuing dilapidations, thereby settling any complaint about the lawfulness of re-entry or the validity of the section 146 notice. The breach of the alienation covenant was a continuing breach, not waived by acceptance of rent. The section 146 notice was sufficiently clear to a reasonable recipient. The judge's refusal to grant relief from forfeiture was justified as the tenant had no remaining interest to protect.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed