https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285757 A tenancy could not be validly terminated because the ejectment notice did not satisfy the longer notice period required for a manufacturing tenancy under the governing property law, and service of the notice was not proved in law. Registered post endorsement showed only that the article was left, which did not establish proper tender or effective service; personal service was also unproved because no adequate attempt was made to serve authorised representatives before affixation. The presumption arising from certificate of posting was displaced by the surrounding facts, so the ejectment proceeding could not stand on defective notice and defective service. en-us Thu, 09 May 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jan 2020 15:29:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285757 A tenancy could not be validly terminated because the ejectment notice did not satisfy the longer notice period required for a manufacturing tenancy under the governing property law, and service of the notice was not proved in law. Registered post endorsement showed only that the article was left, which did not establish proper tender or effective service; personal service was also unproved because no adequate attempt was made to serve authorised representatives before affixation. The presumption arising from certificate of posting was displaced by the surrounding facts, so the ejectment proceeding could not stand on defective notice and defective service. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 09 May 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285757