https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193687 In a banking-company winding up, the High Court's special jurisdiction extended to connected landlord-tenant and assignment issues because the company was already being wound up and a provisional liquidator had been appointed. The lease termination was invalid: suspension of banking activity did not amount to breach of the user clause, and arrears were not satisfactorily proved. As the lease therefore continued and the deed permitted assignment, the liquidator could assign the lease despite section 15 of the Rent Act. Section 6 of the Land Requisition Act did not render the assignment void, and the liquidator was not required to disclaim the premises as part of winding up administration. en-us Mon, 03 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Aug 2017 12:37:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193687 In a banking-company winding up, the High Court's special jurisdiction extended to connected landlord-tenant and assignment issues because the company was already being wound up and a provisional liquidator had been appointed. The lease termination was invalid: suspension of banking activity did not amount to breach of the user clause, and arrears were not satisfactorily proved. As the lease therefore continued and the deed permitted assignment, the liquidator could assign the lease despite section 15 of the Rent Act. Section 6 of the Land Requisition Act did not render the assignment void, and the liquidator was not required to disclaim the premises as part of winding up administration. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 03 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193687