https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286857 Continuous physical absence from leased premises for six months raises a presumption that the tenant has ceased to occupy the building under Section 11(4)(v) of the Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. That presumption is rebutted only by proof of de facto possession for the purpose of the tenancy, supported by outward indicia of occupation, not merely an intention to return. Occasional cleaning of the room was insufficient to establish actual occupation or retention of possession, and no reasonable cause for the prolonged non-occupation was proved. The statutory ground was therefore established and eviction was warranted. en-us Tue, 21 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:23:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286857 Continuous physical absence from leased premises for six months raises a presumption that the tenant has ceased to occupy the building under Section 11(4)(v) of the Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. That presumption is rebutted only by proof of de facto possession for the purpose of the tenancy, supported by outward indicia of occupation, not merely an intention to return. Occasional cleaning of the room was insufficient to establish actual occupation or retention of possession, and no reasonable cause for the prolonged non-occupation was proved. The statutory ground was therefore established and eviction was warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Mar 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286857