https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293972 The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, affirming that the sub-letting by the appellant was without the landlord's explicit consent, as required by Section 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The Court emphasized that implied consent cannot be inferred merely from inaction or acceptance of rent; there must be a clear, positive act of consent from the landlord. The appeal was dismissed, and the eviction order was maintained. en-us Mon, 29 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:16:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293972 The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, affirming that the sub-letting by the appellant was without the landlord's explicit consent, as required by Section 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The Court emphasized that implied consent cannot be inferred merely from inaction or acceptance of rent; there must be a clear, positive act of consent from the landlord. The appeal was dismissed, and the eviction order was maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 29 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293972