TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether a statutory tenant of commercial premises retains an estate or interest capable of assignment or transfer, and whether the proviso to section 15 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 permits such transfer in the circumstances of the case. (ii) Whether section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 or Order XXI Rule 102 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 could be invoked by the appellant.
Issue (i): Whether a statutory tenant of commercial premises retains an estate or interest capable of assignment or transfer, and whether the proviso to section 15 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 permits such transfer in the circumstances of the case.
Analysis: The decision treated the law as settled that termination of a contractual tenancy does not by itself destroy the tenant's status or interest where the rent statute continues to protect possession. Relying on the later line of authority, the Court held that the statutory tenant continues to enjoy an estate or interest in the premises and, in the case of commercial premises, that interest is not curtailed in the manner applicable to certain residential tenancies. The proviso to section 15 was read as referring to premises held under such leases or class of leases, and not as confined only to contractual leases. On that reading, the notified permission could extend to the transfer of the interest in the premises together with the business assets and goodwill.
Conclusion: The transfer was upheld, and the appellant's challenge on this ground failed.
Issue (ii): Whether section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 or Order XXI Rule 102 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 could be invoked by the appellant.
Analysis: The Court agreed with the High Court that the factual and legal basis for invoking the doctrine of lis pendens under section 52 was absent. It also found no support for the appellant under Order XXI Rule 102, which was not attracted on the facts found.
Conclusion: These provisions were held to be inapplicable to the appellant's case.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed in substance, and the respondent's position on the validity of the transfer was maintained.
Ratio Decidendi: A statutory tenant of commercial premises continues to possess an estate or interest after termination of the contractual tenancy, and that interest may be transferable where the governing rent statute and notification do not prohibit it; ancillary property-law and execution objections cannot override that protection when their conditions are not met.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
