https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166628 An arrangement for occupation of market stalls was treated as a licence, not a lease, because the stall-holders had only limited use during fixed hours and no unrestricted possession or control. The market owners retained continuing possession and statutory responsibilities for cleanliness, disinfection, access control, and compliance with municipal conditions, showing that the word "rent" was used loosely as a fee. The presence of notice and repair clauses, and exclusive use during stated hours, did not by itself create a tenancy. The governing test was whether the parties clearly intended to part with possession; on the stated facts, that intention was not established. en-us Mon, 03 Feb 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166628 An arrangement for occupation of market stalls was treated as a licence, not a lease, because the stall-holders had only limited use during fixed hours and no unrestricted possession or control. The market owners retained continuing possession and statutory responsibilities for cleanliness, disinfection, access control, and compliance with municipal conditions, showing that the word "rent" was used loosely as a fee. The presence of notice and repair clauses, and exclusive use during stated hours, did not by itself create a tenancy. The governing test was whether the parties clearly intended to part with possession; on the stated facts, that intention was not established. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 03 Feb 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166628