https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296470 A tenancy notice to quit was held valid where the statute required only one month's notice expiring with the tenancy month; service by registered post was not mandatory, and actual service with tenant awareness was proved. The Court also upheld concurrent findings that the tenant damaged and replaced a collapsible gate without consent, amounting to acts contrary to clauses (m), (o) and (p) of section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Oral and contemporaneous police and criminal evidence further established nuisance and annoyance. Those findings supported eviction, and no interference with the decree was warranted. en-us Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Jul 2021 11:41:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296470 A tenancy notice to quit was held valid where the statute required only one month's notice expiring with the tenancy month; service by registered post was not mandatory, and actual service with tenant awareness was proved. The Court also upheld concurrent findings that the tenant damaged and replaced a collapsible gate without consent, amounting to acts contrary to clauses (m), (o) and (p) of section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Oral and contemporaneous police and criminal evidence further established nuisance and annoyance. Those findings supported eviction, and no interference with the decree was warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296470