https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175152 Where possession continued with the landlord's assent and rent was accepted, but no valid lease was created, the implied tenancy was governed by section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Because the premises were taken for building purposes and not for agricultural or manufacturing use, the law treated the occupation as a month-to-month tenancy from inception. An annual description of rent did not create a yearly tenancy, as that would contradict the admitted intention and the requirements for a valid lease under section 107. The notice to quit was therefore sufficient to determine the tenancy, and the eviction defence based on a yearly lease failed. en-us Mon, 26 Nov 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Nov 2015 12:36:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175152 Where possession continued with the landlord's assent and rent was accepted, but no valid lease was created, the implied tenancy was governed by section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Because the premises were taken for building purposes and not for agricultural or manufacturing use, the law treated the occupation as a month-to-month tenancy from inception. An annual description of rent did not create a yearly tenancy, as that would contradict the admitted intention and the requirements for a valid lease under section 107. The notice to quit was therefore sufficient to determine the tenancy, and the eviction defence based on a yearly lease failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 26 Nov 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175152