https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168569 A newly constructed building remained outside the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act for ten years from the relevant assessment date, and that period was correctly computed from the first assessment date under the statutory explanation. Transitional protections under Sections 39 and 40 applied only where a suit, appeal or revision was already pending when the Act commenced, so they did not protect an eviction suit filed after commencement. The statutory bar on eviction proceedings under Section 20 could not arise merely because the ten-year exemption expired during later litigation. The eviction decree was therefore sustained and the tenant could not invoke the Act's protection. en-us Thu, 17 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Mar 2015 10:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168569 A newly constructed building remained outside the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act for ten years from the relevant assessment date, and that period was correctly computed from the first assessment date under the statutory explanation. Transitional protections under Sections 39 and 40 applied only where a suit, appeal or revision was already pending when the Act commenced, so they did not protect an eviction suit filed after commencement. The statutory bar on eviction proceedings under Section 20 could not arise merely because the ten-year exemption expired during later litigation. The eviction decree was therefore sustained and the tenant could not invoke the Act's protection. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 17 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168569