https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181875 An undertaking to vacate premises before the High Court did not bar a tenant from invoking Article 136, and the prior view treating such an undertaking as a bar was no longer good law; the preliminary objection was rejected and the appeal remained maintainable. On change of user, the controlling test was whether the actual business stayed linked, allied to, or ancillary to the purpose for which the shop was let. A shift from merchant business to a restaurant was held, on the facts, to be a departure from the permitted user. Even so, because the change was brief, the tenant had reverted to the original business, and other eviction grounds had failed, eviction was not ultimately ordered and possession was retained on enhanced rent. en-us Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Apr 2016 17:24:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181875 An undertaking to vacate premises before the High Court did not bar a tenant from invoking Article 136, and the prior view treating such an undertaking as a bar was no longer good law; the preliminary objection was rejected and the appeal remained maintainable. On change of user, the controlling test was whether the actual business stayed linked, allied to, or ancillary to the purpose for which the shop was let. A shift from merchant business to a restaurant was held, on the facts, to be a departure from the permitted user. Even so, because the change was brief, the tenant had reverted to the original business, and other eviction grounds had failed, eviction was not ultimately ordered and possession was retained on enhanced rent. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181875