<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1990 (1) TMI 309 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176062</link>
    <description>Section 39 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 gives only limited transitional protection to tenants of buildings newly brought under regulation. It applies where the old Act did not previously govern the building, the eviction suit was pending on commencement, and the tenant makes the required deposit of rent, damages, interest, and costs within one month from commencement or from knowledge of pendency, whichever is later. The Supreme Court held that this time limit cannot be postponed until expiry of the ten-year exemption period for new buildings, so a deposit made later does not attract the protection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2015 14:19:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408559" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (1) TMI 309 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176062</link>
      <description>Section 39 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 gives only limited transitional protection to tenants of buildings newly brought under regulation. It applies where the old Act did not previously govern the building, the eviction suit was pending on commencement, and the tenant makes the required deposit of rent, damages, interest, and costs within one month from commencement or from knowledge of pendency, whichever is later. The Supreme Court held that this time limit cannot be postponed until expiry of the ten-year exemption period for new buildings, so a deposit made later does not attract the protection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176062</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>