Katherine

Plaintiffs prosecute a joint appeal in these two consolidated unlawful detainer cases. In Castle Park No. 5 v. Katherine, Civ. A. 14258, plaintiff appeals from an order quashing service of the five-day unlawful detainer summons. 1 In Gochicoa v. Martinez, Civ. A. No. 14314, plaintiff in effect appeals from a judgment, which although on its face in favor of plaintiff, denied him recovery of rents accrued and unpaid prior to the termination of the tenancy. This denial was based on *1047 a previous ruling granting defendant’s motion to strike the allegations of the first amended complaint which pleaded the pretermination rentals.

The issue presented by these appeals is whether a landlord who terminates a month-to-month tenancy may recover rent for the period prior to the termination in an unlawful detainer proceeding. We answer this in the negative and affirm the two trial courts.

The damages recoverable in an unlawful detainer proceeding are controlled by Code of Civil Procedure section 1174. (Unless otherwise stated, all further section references hereafter are to sections of the Code of Civil Procedure.) Section 1174, subdivision (b) provides in part as follows: “(b)…