https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197397 The court dismissed the second appeal with costs, modifying the valuation of damages and rights over the site. The plaintiff was entitled to nominal damages for breach of agreement terms, without being compelled to sell the property to the defendant. The judgment clarified that denial of title by the defendant did not lead to forfeiture of rights under the agreement, distinguishing licenses from leases in this context. The denial of a mandatory injunction was based on the plaintiff's acquiescence in encroachments. Overall, the judgment provided a detailed analysis of contractual terms, forfeiture principles, injunction considerations, and damages assessment, resolving the complex legal issues in the case. en-us Thu, 06 Mar 1952 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Jan 2018 15:00:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197397 The court dismissed the second appeal with costs, modifying the valuation of damages and rights over the site. The plaintiff was entitled to nominal damages for breach of agreement terms, without being compelled to sell the property to the defendant. The judgment clarified that denial of title by the defendant did not lead to forfeiture of rights under the agreement, distinguishing licenses from leases in this context. The denial of a mandatory injunction was based on the plaintiff's acquiescence in encroachments. Overall, the judgment provided a detailed analysis of contractual terms, forfeiture principles, injunction considerations, and damages assessment, resolving the complex legal issues in the case. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 06 Mar 1952 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197397