https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196032 Statutory vesting that substitutes a new lessee in place of the original tenant is not an assignment or sub-letting by the tenant for purposes of rent-control eviction grounds. The court held that where the leasehold interest passes by operation of law, the tenant does not commit the prohibited act under Section 21(1)(f) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, and eviction on that basis is not justified. It further held that, even on the assumption of a transfer or sub-letting, a lease covenant permitting licensing or sub-letting without the landlord's consent removes the arrangement from the rent-control prohibition. The tenant therefore retained protection against eviction on the pleaded ground. en-us Tue, 26 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Nov 2017 15:38:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196032 Statutory vesting that substitutes a new lessee in place of the original tenant is not an assignment or sub-letting by the tenant for purposes of rent-control eviction grounds. The court held that where the leasehold interest passes by operation of law, the tenant does not commit the prohibited act under Section 21(1)(f) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, and eviction on that basis is not justified. It further held that, even on the assumption of a transfer or sub-letting, a lease covenant permitting licensing or sub-letting without the landlord's consent removes the arrangement from the rent-control prohibition. The tenant therefore retained protection against eviction on the pleaded ground. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 26 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196032