https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166626 The court held that the shops and sheds were leased, while the pavements and footpaths were licensed. The repeal of the earlier Act removed the defendant's protection, entitling the plaintiff to possession. The court directed that each party bear its own costs. The court dismissed Civil Appeal No. 1727 of 1968 and allowed Civil Appeal No. 1728 of 1968. en-us Thu, 29 Nov 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166626 The court held that the shops and sheds were leased, while the pavements and footpaths were licensed. The repeal of the earlier Act removed the defendant's protection, entitling the plaintiff to possession. The court directed that each party bear its own costs. The court dismissed Civil Appeal No. 1727 of 1968 and allowed Civil Appeal No. 1728 of 1968. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 29 Nov 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166626