Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Cancellation of lease deed by NOIDA did not confer the Corporate Debtor the status of a tenant holding over within Section 116 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. NOIDA never assented to the Corporate Debtor's continued possession after cancellation. The Supreme Court's judgment in Nand Ram case clarified that after lease expiry, the lessee's status is a tenant at sufferance, not a tenant holding over, unless the landlord assents to continued possession, creating a new tenancy. NOIDA's mere acceptance of the Corporate Debtor's request for lease restoration did not revive the terminated lease or confer any rights u/s 116. The plot was rightly excluded from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. As a development authority, NOIDA is obligated to monitor project implementation, take proactive steps, and protect homebuyers' interests as unsecured financial creditors under statutory provisions. NOIDA can cancel leases, resume sites, and forfeit payments for breaches by lessees. The NCLAT upheld the adjudicating authority's order excluding the plot from CIRP and rejected the resolution plan approval application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
