https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169234 Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings Act was construed so that the bar on "entertainment" of an eviction ground prevents adjudication on merits before three years from purchase, but does not bar filing or institution of the application. The six-month notice requirement was treated as a tenant-protective procedural safeguard capable of waiver, and the tenant was held to have waived the objection by not pursuing it and by contesting the matter on merits. A later acquisition of an undivided interest by the landlord's wife did not extinguish the landlord's bona fide need for the premises. The eviction decree was therefore maintained. en-us Thu, 11 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Apr 2015 11:07:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169234 Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings Act was construed so that the bar on "entertainment" of an eviction ground prevents adjudication on merits before three years from purchase, but does not bar filing or institution of the application. The six-month notice requirement was treated as a tenant-protective procedural safeguard capable of waiver, and the tenant was held to have waived the objection by not pursuing it and by contesting the matter on merits. A later acquisition of an undivided interest by the landlord's wife did not extinguish the landlord's bona fide need for the premises. The eviction decree was therefore maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 11 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169234