Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.68 seconds)The West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997
The Indian Partnership Act, 1932
Section 108 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 106 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Associated Hotels Of India Ltd vs R. N. Kapoor on 19 May, 1959
In Associated Hotels of India Ltd. Vs. R. N. Kapoor (AIR 1959 SC
1262) difference between lease and license was expounded. Speaking for the Bench
K. Subrao, J. laid down that if a document gives only right to use a property in a
20 | P a g e
particular way or under certain terms while possession and control of the owner
thereof, it will a license. The legal possession, therefore, continues to the owner of
the property but the licensee is permitted to make use of the property for a particular
purpose. It is the permission which makes the occupation lawful but does not create
any estate or interest in the property.
Mrs. M. N. Clubwala And Anr vs Fida Hussain Saheb And Ors on 3 February, 1964
Observations of the Supreme Court of India in Sohan Lal
Naraindas v. Laxmidas Raghunath Gadit,[(1971) 1 SCC 276], referring to
M.N. Clubwala (Mrs) (supra) may be looked into:
Khalil Ahmed Bashir Ahmed vs Tufelhussein Samasbhai Sarangpurwala on 13 November, 1987
In Khalil Ahmed Bashir Ahmed Vs.
Tufelhussein Samasbhai Sarangpurwala [(1988) 1 SCC 155] the Court
reiterated that in ascertaining the relationship the intention of the parties is decisive
consideration.
Delta International Ltd vs Shyam Sunder Ganeriwalla And Anr on 9 April, 1999
In Delta International Ltd. Vs. Shyam Sundar Ganeriwalla & Anr. [(1999)
4 SCC 545] it was reiterated by the Supreme Court of India:
Technicians Studio Private Ltd vs Lila Ghosh & Anr on 19 September, 1977
(5) Prima facie, in the absence of a sufficient title or interest to carve out or to
create a similar tenancy by the sitting tenant in favour of a third person, the
person in possession to whom the possession is handed over cannot claim that
the sub-tenancy was created in his favour; because a person having no right
cannot confer any title of tenancy or sub-tenancy. A tenant protected under
statutory provisions with regard to occupation of the premises having no right
to sub-let or transfer the premises, cannot confer any better title. But, this
question is not required to be finally determined in this matter.
(6) Further lease or license is a matter of contract between the parties. Section
107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 inter alia provides that leases of
immovable property may be made either by a registered instrument or by an
oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession; if it is a registered
instrument, it shall be executed by both the lessee and the lessor. This contract
between the parties is to be interpreted or construed on the well-laid principles
23 | P a g e
for construction of contractual terms, viz., for the purpose of construction of
contracts, the intention of the parties is the meaning of the words they have
used and there can be no intention independent of that meaning; when the
terms of the contract are vague or having double intendment, one which is
lawful should be preferred; and the construction may be put on the instrument
perfectly consistent with his doing only what he had a right to do."
It must be kept in mind that this is not a case of unregistered lease. Legal
consequences are different in case of an unregistered lease. M/s Technicians
studio Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Lila Ghosh [(1977) 4 SCC 324] involved the case of part
performance under a void lease. However, the Supreme Court of India reiterated the
principal that intention of the parties is a clue to decide on the actual relationship.