https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220134 An arrangement for management of a flower counter was treated as a contractual licence rather than a tenancy because the society retained legal, physical and symbolic possession, the counter operator had no exclusive possession, and the monthly payment functioned as minimum guaranteed commission linked to sales. The dispute was therefore arbitrable and not barred by tenancy protections. The arbitral proceedings were upheld because the record showed repeated adjournments and sufficient opportunity to defend, with no denial of natural justice. The award was also sustained as it enforced the contractual terms on termination, possession and liquidated damages and was not contrary to public policy. en-us Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220134 An arrangement for management of a flower counter was treated as a contractual licence rather than a tenancy because the society retained legal, physical and symbolic possession, the counter operator had no exclusive possession, and the monthly payment functioned as minimum guaranteed commission linked to sales. The dispute was therefore arbitrable and not barred by tenancy protections. The arbitral proceedings were upheld because the record showed repeated adjournments and sufficient opportunity to defend, with no denial of natural justice. The award was also sustained as it enforced the contractual terms on termination, possession and liquidated damages and was not contrary to public policy. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220134