In Brief
In these consolidated appeals concerning the Madras City Tenants' Protection Act, 1921, the Supreme Court addressed whether a tenant who had sub-let property to others and retained possession of only a small portion remained entitled to statutory protections including court-directed sale at a fixed price. The Court held that such protections require the tenant to maintain actual physical possession of the building constructed. Since the appellant had sub-let the property and occupied only a small portion for business records, it was not entitled to Act protections. The appeals were accordingly dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.