https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175295 A second appeal cannot reopen a finding on landlord's bona fide requirement once the court has expressly refused to formulate a substantial question of law on that issue; subsequent-event pleadings cannot displace that finality. The note also explains that subletting under the M. P. Accommodation Control Act may be inferred where the tenant has withdrawn from the premises, ceased effective control of the business, and allowed another person, including a close relative, to run the establishment independently. On the stated facts, the landlord-requirement issue remained concluded and the subletting finding was sustained, supporting the eviction decree. en-us Mon, 22 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Nov 2015 17:31:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175295 A second appeal cannot reopen a finding on landlord's bona fide requirement once the court has expressly refused to formulate a substantial question of law on that issue; subsequent-event pleadings cannot displace that finality. The note also explains that subletting under the M. P. Accommodation Control Act may be inferred where the tenant has withdrawn from the premises, ceased effective control of the business, and allowed another person, including a close relative, to run the establishment independently. On the stated facts, the landlord-requirement issue remained concluded and the subletting finding was sustained, supporting the eviction decree. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 22 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175295