1 What is the thin line of distinction between the lease and a licence, when exclusive possession is delivered to the person in occupation of the premises? is the main question requiring determination in this case.

2. The facts giving rise to the filing of this second appeal are that the plaintiff- respondent filed a suit for mandatory injunction against the appellant with prayer of directing him to handover the possession of the shop in dispute to the plaintiff which was allegedly given to the defendant 0n 14-10-1975 as a licensee for such a period as the plaintiff desired. It was submitted that the defendant had offered and assured the plaintiff that he would enter into a partnership and in the shop in dispute the business of the sale of dry-fruits in partnership with both the parties shall be carried on. Notwithstanding the assurance and undertaking, it was pleaded that the defendant-appellant was only a licensee in the disputed shop and the license was terminable at any moment at the instance of the plaintiff The defendant-appellant after being put in possession of the suit shop did not settle the terms of partnership allegedly on lame excuses with the result that the plaintiff

Click Here to Read the rest of this document