9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (9) TMI 646X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate For Respondent : MR PC KAVINA Advocate with MR PP BANAJI Advocate ORAL ORDER (Per : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI for the Court) 1. The appellant-Official Liquidator challenges the order of the learned Single Judge made in Company Application No.184 of 2002 on 3.7.2003 directing the Official Liquidator, on receiving the possession of the demised premises from Di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to retain the possession of the premises because the leasehold right of the company was a valuable asset. The learned counsel drew our attention to the agreement to lease, a copy of which was annexed at Ex.A to the Company Petition, in which the period of lease was mentioned as a term for 60 years commencing from the date on which the said premises are ready for occupation . On the basis of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no registered deed of lease was executed between the parties. The learned Single Judge has, while considering the contention that the premises were given for 60 years, rightly held that under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a lease of immoveable property for any term exceeding one year could be made only by a registered instrument and that, since in the present case there was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S v. JAGDISH CHANDRA DEO, DHABAL DEV reported in AIR 1952 SC 23 as followed by a Division Bench of this Court in BABULAL SOMALAL reported in 20 GLR 36, for rejecting the contention of the Official Liquidator that the lease was for a period of 60 years, and treating it as a monthly tenancy. The appeal is, therefore, devoid of any substance and, therefore, summarily rejected. The Civil Application s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
