https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297465 A fixed-term lease that had expired by efflux of time supported a decree for possession on admission under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC where no bona fide triable defence existed. The suit was outside the rent control regime because the agreed rent exceeded the statutory ceiling after the 1988 amendment. No notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was required for determination of the lease. Continuation as a monthly tenant was not proved, as the post-expiry cheques were neither accepted nor encashed and the notices showed refusal to assent to continued occupation. The co-ownership and proposed partition plea did not raise a real defence. en-us Fri, 04 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Sep 2021 16:28:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297465 A fixed-term lease that had expired by efflux of time supported a decree for possession on admission under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC where no bona fide triable defence existed. The suit was outside the rent control regime because the agreed rent exceeded the statutory ceiling after the 1988 amendment. No notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was required for determination of the lease. Continuation as a monthly tenant was not proved, as the post-expiry cheques were neither accepted nor encashed and the notices showed refusal to assent to continued occupation. The co-ownership and proposed partition plea did not raise a real defence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297465