Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.23 seconds)Chander Kanta Singhal Etc. vs Kapadia Exports And Anr. on 11 October, 1996
In RFA Nos.357 & 359/95 (Smt. Chander Kanta Singhal and Anr. v. Kapadia Exports, and Anr. decided on 11.10.96), it was held that it is necessary that a tenant objecting to the validity of the notice to quit under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act must plead which of the requirements of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act had not been complied with. The mere fact that the defendant in the written statement disputed the legality and validity of the notice dated 28.12.1988 without specifying which of the requirement of Section 106 had not been complied with, does not tantamount to making the requisite pleas. Consequently, averments made in para No. 6 and No. 7 of the
Written Statement cannot be construed as an allegation that all requirements of Section 106 of the Transfer of Properly Act were not complied with. Admittedly, the notice to quit dated 28.12.1988 was received by the appellant and by that notice the appellant's tenancy was terminated with the end of the month of tenancy i.e. 31.1.1989. In our opinion, the learned trial Court has rightly held that the appellant's tenancy was duly terminated by the said notice.
Section 113 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
Section 45 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 50 in The Delhi Rent Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Burmah Shell Oil Distributing Now Known ... vs Khaja Midhat Noor And Others on 3 May, 1988
In the absence of registered instrument, the lease shall be deemed to be "lease from month to month," (Bumiah shell Oil Distributing v. Khaja Midhat Noor ) In that view of the matter , the termination of the lease could be by giving a valid notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act.
The Delhi Rent Act, 1995
1