https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192538 A tenant claiming protection from eviction under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act had to comply with the statutory deposit obligations in sections 17(1) and 17(2); non-compliance and remaining rent arrears defeated the claim to protection under section 17(4). On ejectment notice, service under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was not invalid merely because the notice was sent by certificate of posting rather than registered post. The court treated service at the correct address as sufficient on the evidence, with the presumption of service remaining rebuttable. The eviction decree was therefore sustained. en-us Mon, 22 Mar 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jun 2017 10:56:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192538 A tenant claiming protection from eviction under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act had to comply with the statutory deposit obligations in sections 17(1) and 17(2); non-compliance and remaining rent arrears defeated the claim to protection under section 17(4). On ejectment notice, service under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was not invalid merely because the notice was sent by certificate of posting rather than registered post. The court treated service at the correct address as sufficient on the evidence, with the presumption of service remaining rebuttable. The eviction decree was therefore sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 22 Mar 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192538