Mahinder Narain, J. (Oral) ( 1 ) THE appellant before us has been a tenant with respect to Flat No. 103, Akashdeep, 26-A, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. ( 2 ) IT is not disputed that initially a registered tenancy was created with respect to the said premises for a period of three years. The tenancy in terms of the registered lease was to commence from 1. 10. 1982, and the lease deed itself provided that the tenancy would come to an end on 30. 9. 1985. ( 3 ) THE appellant held over the tenancy by a letter of renewal till 1. l0. 1988. ( 4 ) THE landlady got the tenancy of the appellant terminated by notice dated 13. 12. 1988, Ex. Public Witness. 3/e. The notice inter alia stated, "that my client does not want to retain you as her tenant in the aforesaid flat and she hereby terminates your tenancy by means of this notice from the midnight of 31. 1. 89 and you are called upon to hand over the vacant physical possession of the tenanted premises to my client immediately after the midnight of 31. 1. 90. In case you consider that tenancy month is not from the 1 st day of each English calendar month and ending by the last day of the same English calendar month, then take this notice to be one expiring by the midnight of such last day of the tenancy month falling in the month of January 1989, which according to you is correct and you are called upon to hand over the vacant physical possession of the tenanted premises to my client after the midnight of such last day of the tenancy month which according to you is correct. In any case you will have a clear notice of more than 15 days immediately before the termination of your tenancy. " This notice was sent under registered cover as well as under certificate of posting. The registered notice was served on 15. 12. 1988, as is evidenced by the acknowledgment due card. ( 5 ) MR. Ishwar Sahai wanted to take advantage of section 110 of the Transfer of Property Act, which reads ( ) ( 6 ) IN the instant case, as stated above, the registered lease itself makes a provision as to when the lease expires. According to the registered lease, the lease expired on 30. ( 5 ) MR. Ishwar Sahai wanted to take advantage of section 110 of the Transfer of Property Act, which reads ( ) ( 6 ) IN the instant case, as stated above, the registered lease itself makes a provision as to when the lease expires. According to the registered lease, the lease expired on 30. 9. 1985. If the lease expired by agreement of parties on 30. 9. 1985, then the question of exclusion of one day, as contended by Mr. Ishwar Sahai, does not arise. On expiry of the registered lease in this case on 30. 9. 1985, the renewal commenced from 1. 10. 1995, and thereafter it became month to month tenancy, and not a tenancy for a term, in view of the fact that there was no registration of the renewed lease. ( 7 ) IN this view of the matter, the tenancy was rightly terminated by notice of termination dated 13. 12. 1988, Ex. Public Witness. 3/e. As the rent of the premises was Rs. 6. 000. 00, the premises in question is outside the purview of the Delhi Rent Control Act, and in view of the judgment in the case reported as 1994 JT Vol. 7 SC 114 (D. C. Bhatia vs. U. O. I.), decided by the Supreme Court, the suit for ejectment was proper. ( 8 ) AS the tenancy has been validly terminated, and as no protection is available under the provisions of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, in view of the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court, there is no merit in this appeal, and the same is dismissed.