https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174311 A tenant's surrender of tenancy was ineffective unless it was in writing, verified before the Mamlatdar, and followed by the statutory inquiry required by the tenancy scheme. Non-compliance with these mandatory safeguards meant the landlord's possession did not lawfully defeat the tenant's restoration rights under Section 32(1B). The later view in Dhondiram Totoba Kadam was treated as per incuriam because it ignored the mandatory requirements of Sections 15 and 29 and an earlier binding precedent. A claimed transfer to a third party was also rejected for want of supporting factual basis and lawful title. en-us Wed, 29 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Dec 2015 09:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174311 A tenant's surrender of tenancy was ineffective unless it was in writing, verified before the Mamlatdar, and followed by the statutory inquiry required by the tenancy scheme. Non-compliance with these mandatory safeguards meant the landlord's possession did not lawfully defeat the tenant's restoration rights under Section 32(1B). The later view in Dhondiram Totoba Kadam was treated as per incuriam because it ignored the mandatory requirements of Sections 15 and 29 and an earlier binding precedent. A claimed transfer to a third party was also rejected for want of supporting factual basis and lawful title. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 29 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174311