https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283925 Merger of a lease requires complete unity of the lessor's and lessee's interests in the whole property, in the same right, so acquisition of only a partial co-ownership interest does not extinguish the tenancy where the landlord's title remains outstanding. Demolition of a superstructure does not by itself terminate a lease of premises if the site continues to exist, and frustration does not defeat the leasehold estate in that situation. A tenant, and persons claiming under the tenant, remain estopped from denying the landlord's title during the subsistence of the tenancy, so partial co-ownership or possession through the tenant does not defeat eviction. en-us Mon, 31 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Oct 2019 16:10:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283925 Merger of a lease requires complete unity of the lessor's and lessee's interests in the whole property, in the same right, so acquisition of only a partial co-ownership interest does not extinguish the tenancy where the landlord's title remains outstanding. Demolition of a superstructure does not by itself terminate a lease of premises if the site continues to exist, and frustration does not defeat the leasehold estate in that situation. A tenant, and persons claiming under the tenant, remain estopped from denying the landlord's title during the subsistence of the tenancy, so partial co-ownership or possession through the tenant does not defeat eviction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 31 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283925