https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301688 Where eviction is sought on the footing of a subsisting contractual month-to-month tenancy, the landlord must first determine the tenancy by a valid notice to quit under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882; absent that notice, the eviction petition was not maintainable. A tenant's mere denial of the landlord's title did not, by itself, determine the lease by forfeiture under Section 111(g) or dispense with notice, because forfeiture operates only in the manner provided by law. The eviction order could not stand since the tenancy had not been validly terminated. en-us Thu, 14 Dec 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Apr 2022 13:21:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301688 Where eviction is sought on the footing of a subsisting contractual month-to-month tenancy, the landlord must first determine the tenancy by a valid notice to quit under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882; absent that notice, the eviction petition was not maintainable. A tenant's mere denial of the landlord's title did not, by itself, determine the lease by forfeiture under Section 111(g) or dispense with notice, because forfeiture operates only in the manner provided by law. The eviction order could not stand since the tenancy had not been validly terminated. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 14 Dec 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301688