<?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>1967 (7) TMI 128 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162096</link>
    <description>The legal character of occupation depends on the substance of the accommodation agreement, its terms and the surrounding circumstances, not the label used by the parties. Where occupation ends on cessation of employment or transfer, the company may re-allot the flat, levy licence fees, and the agreement expressly negates a landlord-tenant relationship, the arrangement is a licence and not a lease. On that footing, officers occupying the flats did so as licensees on behalf of the company, so the company&#039;s need amounted to its own occupation for rent control purposes. The respondents were therefore entitled to recover possession.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2014 13:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346356" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (7) TMI 128 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162096</link>
      <description>The legal character of occupation depends on the substance of the accommodation agreement, its terms and the surrounding circumstances, not the label used by the parties. Where occupation ends on cessation of employment or transfer, the company may re-allot the flat, levy licence fees, and the agreement expressly negates a landlord-tenant relationship, the arrangement is a licence and not a lease. On that footing, officers occupying the flats did so as licensees on behalf of the company, so the company&#039;s need amounted to its own occupation for rent control purposes. The respondents were therefore entitled to recover possession.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162096</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>