Fixed-term tenancy and registered lease execution supported eviction; absence of dual signatures did not defeat the tenancy challenge.

A fixed-term tenancy can sustain eviction on expiry under Section 11(1)(e) of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982, where the tenant admits a lease for a specified period and that admission is not displaced. The commentary also explains that under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a lease exceeding one year must be created by a registered instrument, but execution is a matter of substance and may be proved from surrounding facts, conduct, and admissions; the absence of both parties' signatures on the document was therefore not ative. A tenant cannot raise a new contrary objection after taking a different stand below, and the eviction decree was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether eviction was sustainable under Section 11(1)(e) of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 on the expiry of the tenancy period, and whether the lease was invalid because the registered kabuliat was not signed by both the lessor and the lessee.

Analysis: The ground under Section 11(1)(e) requires a lease for a specified period and expiry of that period. The tenant had admitted in the written statement that the tenancy was for a fixed term of five years, and that admission could not later be disowned. Under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a lease for a term exceeding one year must be created by a registered instrument, and the statutory requirement that such instrument be executed by both parties does not mean that both signatures must necessarily appear on the document in every case. Execution is a question of substance and may be proved from the surrounding facts, including the parties' conduct and admissions. The challenge based on absence of dual signatures was therefore not accepted. The tenant was also precluded from raising a new objection contrary to the stand taken before the courts below.

Conclusion: The decree of eviction on the ground of expiry of a fixed-term tenancy was upheld, and the tenant's challenge failed.

---