https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355996 The court confirmed the plaintiff's ownership of the suit property based on a Scheme of Arrangement approved by the Delhi High Court. The defendant's claim of tenancy under the Delhi Rent Control Act was rejected as he was deemed a licensee, not a tenant. The court dismissed the defendant's argument on the valuation of the suit for jurisdiction purposes and allowed the suit to proceed. Multiple remedies were deemed permissible, and costs and penalties were imposed on the defendant for dishonest defenses. A compromise order was reached for the defendant to vacate the premises by a specified date or face financial consequences. en-us Tue, 13 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Feb 2018 18:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355996 The court confirmed the plaintiff's ownership of the suit property based on a Scheme of Arrangement approved by the Delhi High Court. The defendant's claim of tenancy under the Delhi Rent Control Act was rejected as he was deemed a licensee, not a tenant. The court dismissed the defendant's argument on the valuation of the suit for jurisdiction purposes and allowed the suit to proceed. Multiple remedies were deemed permissible, and costs and penalties were imposed on the defendant for dishonest defenses. A compromise order was reached for the defendant to vacate the premises by a specified date or face financial consequences. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 13 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355996