<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1982 (9) TMI 241 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199225</link>
    <description>A clear and specifically accepted lease covenant restricting user of premises may be enforced by interim injunction to prevent breach, even if rent control eviction remedies are also available. The Court treated the later order as a permissible clarification of the earlier interim protection of possession, because it did not alter possession rights but only required compliance with the agreed user condition. Withdrawal of an earlier suit did not bar the landlord from seeking or resisting interim relief in the later proceedings, as the earlier suit had become infructuous and no liberty to file afresh had been granted. The tenant-company&#039;s challenge was therefore rejected and the lease condition was sustained pending suit disposal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2018 12:44:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510159" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (9) TMI 241 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199225</link>
      <description>A clear and specifically accepted lease covenant restricting user of premises may be enforced by interim injunction to prevent breach, even if rent control eviction remedies are also available. The Court treated the later order as a permissible clarification of the earlier interim protection of possession, because it did not alter possession rights but only required compliance with the agreed user condition. Withdrawal of an earlier suit did not bar the landlord from seeking or resisting interim relief in the later proceedings, as the earlier suit had become infructuous and no liberty to file afresh had been granted. The tenant-company&#039;s challenge was therefore rejected and the lease condition was sustained pending suit disposal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199225</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>