https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182509 The controlling test for distinguishing a lease from a licence is the real intention of the parties as gathered from the instrument as a whole and, where necessary, the surrounding circumstances; exclusive possession is relevant but not isive. Where the grantor lacked power to create a lease without prior written consent, a sub-lease could not be inferred contrary to the deed and the statutory constraint. Reading the agreement with the relevant tenancy and property law provisions, the Court treated the express exclusion of tenancy language, the conditional reference to a future sub-lease, and the permissive terms for running the petrol station as consistent with a licence. The agreement was therefore held to be a licence, not a lease. en-us Fri, 09 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 May 2016 12:22:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182509 The controlling test for distinguishing a lease from a licence is the real intention of the parties as gathered from the instrument as a whole and, where necessary, the surrounding circumstances; exclusive possession is relevant but not isive. Where the grantor lacked power to create a lease without prior written consent, a sub-lease could not be inferred contrary to the deed and the statutory constraint. Reading the agreement with the relevant tenancy and property law provisions, the Court treated the express exclusion of tenancy language, the conditional reference to a future sub-lease, and the permissive terms for running the petrol station as consistent with a licence. The agreement was therefore held to be a licence, not a lease. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 09 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182509