<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1983 (12) TMI 244 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101072</link>
    <description>A registered lease deed was construed as creating a permanent lease with heritable and transferable incidents, because a surrender covenant did not negate its enduring character. On the facts described, leasehold and promoter-acquired property were treated as vesting in the company on incorporation without a separate conveyance. The text also states that no valid termination or forfeiture was established, so the occupant was not merely a tenant holding over. Long acceptance of rent and continued recognition of successor status attracted acquiescence, and the alternative plea of adverse possession was said to support the limited permanent tenancy interest claimed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:16:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138122" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (12) TMI 244 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101072</link>
      <description>A registered lease deed was construed as creating a permanent lease with heritable and transferable incidents, because a surrender covenant did not negate its enduring character. On the facts described, leasehold and promoter-acquired property were treated as vesting in the company on incorporation without a separate conveyance. The text also states that no valid termination or forfeiture was established, so the occupant was not merely a tenant holding over. Long acceptance of rent and continued recognition of successor status attracted acquiescence, and the alternative plea of adverse possession was said to support the limited permanent tenancy interest claimed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>