https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282935 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower courts' order, and rejected the plaintiff's application to strike out the tenant's defense. The Court emphasized the necessity to apply the modified provisions of the new Act, granting the Controller discretion in ejectment proceedings, to the present suit for a case-by-case evaluation. The failure of lower courts to consider Section 15(7) of the new Act led to a trial not in accordance with the law, warranting the appeal's success despite the defendant's counsel not referencing Section 57 of the 1958 Act. en-us Tue, 17 Dec 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Aug 2019 14:20:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282935 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower courts' order, and rejected the plaintiff's application to strike out the tenant's defense. The Court emphasized the necessity to apply the modified provisions of the new Act, granting the Controller discretion in ejectment proceedings, to the present suit for a case-by-case evaluation. The failure of lower courts to consider Section 15(7) of the new Act led to a trial not in accordance with the law, warranting the appeal's success despite the defendant's counsel not referencing Section 57 of the 1958 Act. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 17 Dec 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282935