<?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>2016 (6) TMI 1242 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194719</link>
    <description>An unregistered lease deed may still be relied on for collateral purposes, including to examine the nature of possession and the relationship between the parties, when supported by other evidence. On the facts discussed, the lower appellate court&#039;s reliance on the lease document, attesting witness testimony, surrounding circumstances, and the tenant&#039;s failure to enter the witness-box was treated as a possible view. The finding that tenancy was proved and validly terminated was therefore not disturbed, and the challenge based on alleged surrender of tenancy did not succeed. The discussion also indicates that such concurrent findings will not be interfered with in second appeal unless shown to be perverse or unsupported by the record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2017 07:05:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=490081" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 1242 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194719</link>
      <description>An unregistered lease deed may still be relied on for collateral purposes, including to examine the nature of possession and the relationship between the parties, when supported by other evidence. On the facts discussed, the lower appellate court&#039;s reliance on the lease document, attesting witness testimony, surrounding circumstances, and the tenant&#039;s failure to enter the witness-box was treated as a possible view. The finding that tenancy was proved and validly terminated was therefore not disturbed, and the challenge based on alleged surrender of tenancy did not succeed. The discussion also indicates that such concurrent findings will not be interfered with in second appeal unless shown to be perverse or unsupported by the record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194719</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>