CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY

Project Report

REVOCATION OF LICENCE
(Law of Property)

Submitted to: Submitted by:

Dr. B.R.N. Sharma Sahil Suman
(Faculty: Property Law) Roll No:1849(BBA. LL.B)
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The present project on the “Revocation of licence” has been able to get its final shape
with the support and help of people from various quarters. My sincere thanks go to all the
members without whom the study could not have come to its present state. I am proud to
acknowledge gratitude to the individuals during my study and without whom the study
may not be completed. I have taken this opportunity to thank those who genuinely helped
me.

With immense pleasure, I express my deepest sense of gratitude to MR.

B.R.N.SHARMA, Faculty for property law, Chanakya National Law University for
helping me in my project. I am also thankful to the whole Chanakya National Law
University family that provided me all the material I required for the project. Not to
forget thanking to my parents without the co-operation of which completion of this
project would not had been possible.

I have made every effort to acknowledge credits, but I apologies in advance for any
omission that may have inadvertently taken place.

Last but not least I would like to thank Almighty whose blessing helped me to complete
the project.

SAHIL SUMAN

ROLL NO. 1849, THIRD

SEMESTER
 DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I, SAHIL SUMAN, student of Chanakya National Law University hereby declare

that the work reported in the B.B.A.LL.B.(HONS.) project report entitled:
“Revocation of licence” submitted at Chanakya National Law University, Patna is
an authentic record of my work carried out under the supervision of Mr. B.R.N.
Sharma . I have not submitted this work elsewhere for any other degree or
diploma. I am responsible for the contents of my Project Report.

(Signature of the Candidate)

NAME: SAHIL SUMAN

ROLL NO: 1849
COURSE: B.B.A., LL.B. (Hons.)
SEMESTER: 2018-2019 (3rd) SESSION:
2017-2022
Method of Research:
The researcher has adopted a purely doctrinal method of research. The researcher has made
extensive use of the library at the Chanakya National Law University and also the internet
sources.

Sources of Data:
The following secondary sources of data have been used in the project-

1. Articles
2. Books
3. Internet

Method of Writing:
The method of writing followed in the course of this research paper is primarily analytical.

Research Questions:
The researcher has formulated following research questions:

1 What is a licence and what are its types.

2 When the licence will be deemed to be revoked.

3 What are the basic components of a licence.

Aims and Objectives:

The researcher aims to study about the Revocation of Licence.

Hypothesis:

• The researcher on close examination believes that revocation of licence can be done on
certain criteria mentioned.
• The researcher on close examination believes that licence does not confer an interest or
property in the thing.
Table of contents:

1 Declaration and Acknowledgement

2 Introduction

3 Distinction between lease and licence

4 Revocation of licence

4.1 when a licence can be revoked

5 Case law

6 Conclusion and Suggestions

7 Bibliography
INTRODUCTION
License, in property law, permission to enter or use the property of another. There are three
categories of license: bare licenses, contractual licenses, and licenses coupled with an interest. A
bare license occurs when a person enters or uses the property of another with the express or
implied permission of the owner or under circumstances that would provide a good defense
against an action for trespass. 1For example, a person entering a gas station to ask for directions
is a licensee and not a trespasser. Contractual license provides an express or implied permission
to enter or use the property in exchange for some consideration. For example, the purchase of a
movie ticket allows the ticket holder a license to enter the theatre at a particular time. Licenses
that are acquired by contract normally include the right to use property that is protected by
patent, copyright, or trademark. A license coupled with an interest arises when a person acquires
the right to take possession of property located on someone else’s land, as when a lender
acquires the right to repossess an automobile that is located on private property after the
borrower has defaulted on a loan.

Bare licenses generally are not assignable (transferable) and are revocable at will by the property
owner. The assignability and revocability of contractual licenses normally depend on the terms
of the contract. Licenses coupled with an interest usually are both assignable and irrevocable, at
least until the holder of the license has had a reasonable time to retrieve the property that gave
rise to the license.

When a landowner permits another to use the land under circumstances in which it is reasonable
to foresee that the licensee will spend money or otherwise change position in the belief that the
license will not be revoked, the license may become irrevocable. For example, if a person owns
two parcels, one of which has no access to a public road, sells the landlocked parcel to another
person, and gives him permission to build a driveway across the lot the seller has retained, the
license becomes irrevocable when the buyer invests in the property, reasonably believing that the
permission will not be revoked. When the license becomes irrevocable, it may be called an
“executed parol license,” though it is more accurately called a servitude created by estoppel, a
term that better describes both the process used to create the right and the resulting right itself.

1
https://www.britannica.com/topic/license
An executed parol license creates a right that runs with the land indefinitely, a right properly
described as a servitude. Describing it as an (irrevocable) executed parol license generates
unnecessary complication in the law by creating an unneeded, redundant category. It also creates
possible confusion because it suggests that there may be some body of law, other than servitudes
law, that governs secondary questions like the scope and termination of executed parol licenses.

CONCEPT OF LICENCE
A licence is a personal right granted to a person to do something upon immovable
property of the grantor and does not amount to the creation of interest in the property
itself. It is purely a permissive right and is personal to the grantee. It creates no duties
and obligations upon the persons making the grant and is, therefore, revocable except
in certain circumstances expressly provided for in the Indian Easements act, 1882
itself2. The licence, when granted, has not other effect to confer liberty upon the
licencee to go upon the land which would otherwise be lawful. A licence may be oral
in which case, terms, conditions and the nature of the licence, can be gathered from
the purpose for which the licence is granted coupled with the conduct of the parties
and the circumstances which may have led to the grant of the licence. Every licence is
governed by the provisions under the Easements act.
A licence does not confer an interest or property in the thing, and though it may be
coupled with a grant which conveys an interest in property, licence by itself does not
confer any interest.
Where the parties entered into a partition agreement and divided the property giving themselves
certain rights, it would not amount to a licence.
The negative definition of licence under Indian law makes it necessary that before a
right can be shown to be a licence only, it must be proved not to be an easement or an
interest in the property.

A .LICENCE UNDER ENGLISH LAW

2
https://coporatelaws.wordpress.com/.../concept-of-leave-and-license-under-indian-law/
According to English Law, a licence is purely a personal privilege or right enabling
the licencee to do something on the land of the licensor which would otherwise be
unlawful.It is an excuse by reason of the consent of the licensor for doing an act which
would otherwise be unlawful. It is merely a leave to do a thing, which enables the
licencee to do lawfully what he could not otherwise do except unlawfully.
A licence is merely a permission to do an act, which without such permission would
amount to a trespass. A dispensation or licence properly passeth no interest, nor alters
or transfers property in anything, but only makes an action lawful, which without it
had been unlawful3.
Licence is only a permission to do something on an immovable property like occupation,
or enjoying fruit thereof, or using it for some other purpose.
License is an official permit or permission to carry on some business or do some
act which without the license would be unlawful and the words license and permit are
often used synonymously. Licence is interchangeable with permission. Permission or
licence is granted for use of an immovable property for a particular purpose given by
the granter to the grantee which as of a necessity in his retention of dominant right of
possession over the immovable property with the granter.

B.LICENCE UNDER INDIAN LAW

In India, the Indian Easements Act, 1882 provides for law relating to licences in property law.
Section 52 of Indian Easements Act, 1882 defines Licence as under:
“Where one person grants to another, or to a definite number of other persons, a right
to do or continue to do, in or upon immovable property of the grantor, something
which would, in the absence of such rights, be unlawful, and such right does not
amount to an easement or an interest in the property, the right is called a licence.”
From the above definition of licence, it seems that if a person himself has acquired a
right or interest in an immovable property through an instrument, the right conveyed
in his favour in that instrument, will not be licence. In India, judicial and legislative
definitions of licence have followed the English definitions of the term.
3
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/definition-license/
Under Section 52, if a person is given the right to use the immovable property in a
particular way under certain terms while retaining control and possession of the same,
the person so permitted is only a licencee. The question that arises in this context is
that whether the relationship is that of landlord-tenant or licensor-licensee. The
relationship depends on the intention of the parties that whether there was interest in
the land or merely personal privilege without any interest.
A licence cannot be granted only in favour of definite number of persons and not in
favour of fluctuating body or individuals. The agreement involved in the case, even if
binding on the defendants, cannot be considered to be at least a bilateral agreement
between the representatives of the two parties and containing reciprocal conditions. A
licence is a personal right given to the licencee and, therefore, Section 56 of the
Easements Act, 1882 provides that licence cannot be transferred by the licencee or
exercised by his servants and agents.
The Supreme Court in# Associated Hotels of India Ltd. v. R.N. Kapoor summed the concept
of Licence as under:
“Under the aforesaid section, if a document gives only a right to use the property in
particular way or under certain terms while it remains in the possession and control of
the owner thereof, it will be a licence. The legal possession, thereof, continues to be
with the owner of the property, but the licencee is permitted to make use of the
premises for a particular purpose. But for the permission, his occupation would be
unlawful. It does not create in his favour any estate or interest in the property.4”

4
https://coporatelaws.wordpress.com/.../concept-of-leave-and-license-under-indian-law/
Distinction between Lease and Licence
The term ‘lease’ and ‘license’ are defined under Section 105 of the Transfer of Property Act and
Section 52 of the Indian Easements Act respectively.

Section 105 of Transfer of Property Act:

“Lease Defined. A lease of immovable property is a transfer of a right to enjoy such property,
made for a certain time, express or implied, or in perpetuity, in consideration of a price paid or
promised, or of money, a share of crops, service or any other thing of value, to be rendered
periodically or on specified occasions to the transferor by the transferee, who accepts the transfer
on such terms.”

Section 52 of the Easements Act, 1882:

“License, Defined. Where one person grants to another, or to a definite number of other persons,
a right to do, or continue to do, in or upon the immovable property of the grantor, something
which would, in the absence of such right, be unlawful, and such right does not amount to an
easement or an interest in the property, the right is called, a license.”

“Lease” is a word which everyone is aware of, and hears it day in and day out while dealing the
transactions related to immovable property. Lease can be defined as the right to enjoy an
immovable property for a certain period of time, in consideration of a price paid by the person
getting possession of the property.

Under Black’s Law dictionary, “Lease” can be defined as a conveyance of lands tenements to a
person for life, for a term of years, or at will, in consideration of rent or some other recompense.
Oxford Dictionary of Law defines it as “a contract under which an owner of property grants
another person exclusive possession of the property for an agreed period, in return for rent and
sometimes for a capital sum known as a premium.

Section 105 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 defines lease and one would be easily able to
derive some of the important characteristics of a lease such as transfer of an interest, parties to
the lease, subject matter of lease etc. But, there is another provision or legal principle which at
sometimes is confused with the concept of lease i.e. Licence5.

Black’s Law Dictionary defines “Licence” in the context of property law as an authority to do a
particular act or series of acts upon another’s land without possessing any estate therein. Oxford
Dictionary of Law defines it as Permission to enter or occupy a person’s land for an agreed
purpose.

Both the provisions look similar, then what make them different is a very important question,
which has to be resolved, and it is abstruse to do so. Sometimes, there arise some situations,
which abridge difference between them. In order to understand the difference between these two
provisions and to know the situation, which they may conflict, it becomes very important to
understand the basic features of both Lease and Licence.

Generally, a lease contemplates the following:

a) a demise or a transfer of a right to enjoy property;
b) for a term or in perpetuity;
c) in consideration of a price paid or promised, or of money, a share of crop or services or other
things of value to be rendered periodically or on specified occasions to the transferor.

The essential characteristic of a lease are:

1. transfer of an interest;
2. parties to a lease;
3. subject matter of lease;
4. types of lease;
5. duration of lease; and

6. consideration for lease.

Transfer of Interest

5
Section 105 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882
A lease a transaction with respect to immovable property and creates a right to enjoy such
property for a certain term and for consideration on the conditions mentioned in it. The right to
possess and enjoy the property is transferred in favour of the lessee and he acquires this interest
through the conveyance of the lease. After the creation of such an interest, a tenant or a subtenant
is entitled to remain in possession thereof until the lease is duly terminated and eviction takes
place in accordance to law. The relationship of landlord and tenant can come into existence only
after the transfer of an interest in immovable property pursuant to a contract and creates a right in
rem. Where there is no transfer of interest there is no lease.Further, if an option is given to the
lessor by the lessee himself to resume the leasehold, it is a personal covenant and does not create
an interest in the land.6

Parties in Lease
The parties to the lease are the transferor, who is called the lessor or landloard, and the
transferee, who is called the lessee or tenant. Both the parties must be competent to contract. The
lessor and the lessee cannot be the same person, they have to be two different persons.A lessor
can be an absolute owner of the land or a joint tenant or a lessee himselfbut above all must be
competent to contract. Thus minors, or unregistered associations cannot be lessees.

Subject Matter of Lease

The subject matter of a lease is a specific immovable property such as land, houses, factories,
shops, minerals, buildings etc. Usually a lease of a house and a shop includes not only the
superstructure but also the site, unless the same is specifically excluded from the definition of the
land in the lease deed.However, terrace and air space above a tenanted multi-storeyed building
are not included in lease.

Duration of Lease
The lease need not be for fixed period but its duration should be definite. An uncertainty as to the
duration of the term will be detrimental to the lease.When the lease is for specific period, its
period cannot be infinite by mere provisions of renewal every year.

6
www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1765/Difference-between-lease-and-licence.html
Consideration for Lease

There must be a consideration fixed for lease for lease that may be in the form of: a)
money;
b) money’s worth such as a share in crops;
c) service or any other thing of value, to be rendered periodically or on specified occasions to the
transferor by the transferee.
Consideration may be termed as rent plus premium as well as rent alone or premium alone. Also,
a lease without consideration is invalid.

Licence
A licence is a right to do or continue to do, in or upon the immovable property of the grantor,
something which would in the absence of such right is unlawful, and such right does not amount
to an easement or an interest in the property. Further, it is an authority to do a particular act or
series of acts upon another’s land without possessing any estate therein. 7

Thus, the primary distinction between a lease and a licence is that the lease is a transfer of a right
in a specific immovable property, whereas, licence is a bare permission and a licencee is not
entitled to notice to quit before evidence.

Primary distinctions between Lease and Licence:

1. A lease is a transfer of an interest in a specific immovable property, while licence is a

bare permission, without any transfer of an interest.

2. A lease creates an interest in favour of the leassee with respect of the property, but a
licence does not create such an interest.

3. A lease is both transferable and heritable, a sub tenancy can be created by the tenant and
on the death of the tenant, the tenancy can be inherited by his/her legal heir, whereas, licence is
neither transferable nor heritable.
7
Ibid
4. A licence comes to an end with the death of either the grantor or the garantee, since it is a
personal contract, but a lease does not comes to an end on either the death of the grantor or
grantee.

5. A licence can be withdrawn at any time at the pleasure of the grantor but the lease can
come to an end only in accordance with the terms and condition stipulated in the contract of
tenancy agreement.

6. A lease is unaffected by the transfer of the property by sale in favour of a third party. It
continues and the purchaser has to wait till the time period for which the tenancy was created is
over before he can get the possession, whereas, in case of a licence, if the property is sold to a
third party, it comes to n end immediately.

7. A lessee has a right to protect the possession in his own right. Whereas, a licencee cannot
defend his possession in his own name as he does not have any proprietary right in the property8.

8. A lessee in possession of the property is entitled to any improvements or accessions made

to the property, while a licencee is not.

ANALYSIS OF REVOCATION OF LICENCE

8
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/definition-license/
 Revocation means termination of the Licence . A Licence revocable at the pleasure
of licensor or generator but under the two circumstances it can not be revoked. A bare
licence can always be revoked by grantor. A licence, unlike a contract, creates no
mutual obligation and rights between parties and it may be revoked under this section
except when it is one which falls within the exception mentioned therein. The power
of revoking a bare licence given by the section to the licensor is not affected by the
fact that the licence has been given for a valuable consideration 9. The fact that a
licence has been acquired for an agreed term would not affect the right of the licensor
to revoke it at any time where it is only a bare licence. The licensor has the power to
revoke a licence at any time and his right to do so is not dependent upon his giving a
reasonable notice or sufficient time to the licensee as a condition precedent. The right
of a licensee to get a reasonable notice before revocation and the right of the licensor
to revoke a licence are not interrelated in the sense that the licensor could be
restrained from exercising his right without issuing such a notice as a condition
precedent.

WHEN A LICENCE CAN BE REVOKED

A license is deemed to be revoked-

(a) when, from a cause preceding the grant of it, the grantor ceases to have any interest in the
property affected by the license;

(b) when the licensee releases it, expressly or impliedly, to the grantor or his representative;

(c) where it has been granted for a limited period, or acquired on condition that it shall become
void on the performance or non-performance of a specified act, and the period expires, or the
conditions is fulfilled;

(d) where the property affected by the license is destroyed or by superior force so permanently
altered that the licensee can no longer exercise his right;

(e) where the Licensee becomes entitled to the absolute ownership of the property affected by the
license;

9
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/definition-license/
(f) where the license is granted for a specified purpose and the purpose is attained or abandoned,
or becomes impracticable;

(g) where the license is granted to the licensee as holding a particular office, employment or
character, and such office, employment or character ceases to exist;

(h) where the license totally ceases to be used as such for an unbroken period of twenty years,
and such cessation is not in pursuance of a contract between the grantor and the licensee;

(i) in the case of an accessory license, when the interest or right to which it is accessory ceases to
exist.10

CASE LAW

• PRATAPSINGH Vs. DHUMSINGH . AIR-1915 ALL-382

Allahabad high court in this case held that a licence is irrevocable u/s 60(1) it is
proved that the tenants of a particular village had been allowed , by the plaintiffs
predecessor - interest , to cut firewood free of charge from the land now belonging
to the plaintiffs . A suit was filed by the plaintiffs for perpetual injunction
restraining tenants from interfering , in any way , in future , with the plaintiffs
trees . from this fact , the court construed a licence granted to the tenants to go upon
the plaintiffs land and cut the firewood free of charge. the plaintiffs, however ,
argued that the licence was in any case , revocable. the court negatived this is plea,
relying on the provision of this Act and the leading English cases on on the point ,
and held that since the licence was coipled with a grant oit was irrevocable.
• ZHUNKA BHAKAR Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 2000.11
Bombay high court held that licence for zhunka bhakar are irrevocable in this
case government itself had prescribe the plan for the construction of structure to be
used as zhunka bhakar centres . the plan sanctioned for the structure leaves no
manner of doubt that the structure of temporary nature, and not a work of
permanent character as envisaged u/s 60 of the act. moreover , in terms of the
10
Ibid
11
2002 (1) BomCR 246, (2002)
 agreement executed cost but the permission granted was not in any manner be
deemed to covey to the lcencee any right to / or over , or any in interest in the said
land are any easement thereof . the petitioner has , therefore given up their
easementary right if any, under the agreement , and they cannot now be hard to say
that they had accurate esamentary right u/s 60 of the ACT wich render their licence
irrevocable S.61 provides for that revocations of a licence may be expressed or
implied.
● Associated Hotels of India Ltd. vs. R.N. Kapoor12
oA lease is a transfer of an interest in land. The interest transferred is called the leasehold
interest. The Lesser parts with his right to enjoy the property during the term of the lease and
the lessee gets that right to the exclusion of the Lesser.
o In case of license, the legal possession continues to be with the owner of the property, but
the licensee is permitted to make use of the premises for a particular purpose. But for the
permission his occupation would be unlawful. It does not create in his favour any estate or
interest in the property.

● Mrs. M.N. Clubwala v. Fida Hussain Saheb13,

o Whether an agreement creates between the parties the relationship of landlord and
tenant or merely that of licensor and licensee the decisive consideration is the intention of the
parties. This intention has to be ascertained on a consideration of all the relevant provisions in
the agreement.

● Chandu Lal vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

14
o The intention of the parties is the real test for ascertaining the character of a
document. o If a document gives only a right to use the property in a particular way but its
possession and control remains with the owner thereof, it will be a license. In such a case the
legal possession remains with the owner of the property, the licensee being permitted to make
use of the property for a particular purpose.

12
[1960] 1 SCR 368 (Supreme Court, 1959)
13
[1964] 6 SCR 642 (Supreme Court, 1964)
14
AIR 1978 Delhi 174 (Delhi High Court, 1978)
o Exclusive possession does not militate against the concept of a license, if the
circumstances negative any intention to create a tenancy. o A license only makes an action
lawful which without it would be unlawful, but does not transfer any interest in favor of
the licensee in respect of the property.
o In the case of a license there is something less than a right to enjoy the property in the
licensee, while on the other hand, in the case of a lease, there is a transfer of a right to
enjoy the property.
o A bare licensee having no interest in the property cannot maintain an action for its
possession.

● Rajbir Kaur and Anr. vs. S. Chokesiri and Co. AIR 1988 SC 1845 o The question
whether a transaction is a lease or licence “turns on the operative intention of the parties
and there is no single, simple litmus test to distinguish one from the other.”
o The grant only for the right to use the premises without being entitled to the exclusive
possession thereof operates merely as a licence.
o Exclusive possession itself is not decisive in favour of a lease and against a mere licence,
for, even the grant of exclusive possession might turn out to be only a licence and not a
lease where the grantor himself has no power to grant the lease.

● Delta International Limited vs. Shyam Sundar Ganeriwalla & Another, AIR 1999
SC 2607
o To find out whether the document creates lease or license real test is to find out ‘the
intention of the parties’; keeping in mind that in cases where exclusive possession is
given, the line between lease and licence is very thin.

● Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Pradip Oil Corporation and Anr., 100 (2002)
DLT 442 (Delhi High Court, 2002) o A mere license does not create interest in the
property to which it relates. Lease on the other hand, would amount to transfer of property.
 o License may be personal or contractual. o A licensee without the grant creates a right in
the licensor to enter into a land and enjoy it. o By reason of a license, no estate or interest
in the property is created. o A license, inter alia, (a) is not assignable; (b) does not entitle
the licensee to sue the stranger in his own name; (c) it is revocable and (d) it is determined
when the grantor makes subsequent assignment.

• Madhu Behal and Anr. vs. Rishi Kumar and Anr., (2009) 3 PLR 628 (Punjab
& Haryana High Court, 2009) o It is never a nomenclature in the document that
governs the decision as to whether a document as a ‘lease’ or a ‘licence’.
o The essential feature that distinguishes a lease from licence is always a transfer of interest
in the demised property in a transaction of lease while a licensee does not involve any
such transfer of interest.
o The lease is heritable while license is personal to the grantee. o The legal possession of
the property is inevitably transferred to a tenant under lease while in a transaction of
license the legal possession continues with the licensee and the licensee has a mere right
of user of the premises in a particular fashion mentioned under the document.

• In Booker v. Palmer[xxix], Lord Green stated that-“There is one golden rule to be

followed is that law does not impute an intention to enter into contractual
relationships where the circumstances and the conduct of the parties negative any
intention of the kind.”

• In Cubb v. Lane[xxx], Lord Denning said that-“The question in all these cases is
one of intention: Did the circumstances and conduct of the parties show that all
that was intended was that the occupier should have a personal privilege with no
interest in the land.”

Conclusion
Such a statement does not reveal whether it is a transaction or a legal relationship. If the latter, it
may be revocable or irrevocable, and may have, in either case, a variety of other characteristics.
If a transaction, it may be unwritten, or written but unsealed, or couched in unusual terms, or
designed for a special purpose; its legal consequences will vary with these circumstances.

The conclusion that the term license implies nothing does not mean that there is no law of
licenses. There is license law, but it must be stated in terms of particular types of cases. Where a
licensor gives no reason to expect otherwise, the licensee’s privileges can be terminated at will.
Where a licensor manifests an intention that the privilege shall be more enduring, the
consequences depend upon other circumstances. If it offends no legal policy, the license may
create a true easement. If it offends the rule requiring a sealed instrument, it will probably create
an easement, but the licensee can obtain relief only through equitable procedure. If enforcement
of the license would encumber the land with relatively useless burdens, neither the parties’
expectations nor their formalities nor their expenditures will give the interest the characteristics
of an easement.

This simple rationalization of license cases is largely impeded by the ambiguous usage of license
to signify sometimes a transaction, sometimes a relationship. All the recent writers agree that one
of the usages should be adopted and the other rejected, but disagree on which to adopt and which
to reject.

The usage of license to signify a transaction is widely used by laymen, who rarely think in terms
of jural relations. It is often compared with the terms lease and easement, which usually signify
certain kinds of transactions. So long as the legal vocabulary contains the nouns licensor and
licensee to designate the parties to the transaction, and the verb to license for the process of
transacting, it is fanciful to imagine that lawyers will refrain from describing these operative
facts as a license.

The usage of license to signify a relationship can be more readily eliminated. Usage of the
additional term license suggests distinctions which seldom exist. The recognition of legal
relations as distinguished from operative facts demands terms which suggest the distinction, just
as fee and leasehold suggest something different from lease.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
 [1] Dr.G.P TRIPATHI “THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT,1882”

[2] UNIVERSAL’S NEW DELHI-INDIA “THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTYACT,1882

WITH SHORT NOTES”.

[3] PROF. G.C. VENKATA SUBBARAO “LECTURES AND COMMENARIES ON THE

TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT”, SIXTH EDITION.

[4] MD. ALAMIN AND MD. ABDUS SALAM “LAW OF TRANSFER OF PROPERTY”,
CHAPTER 4, 1ST EDITION, (2012).

[5] DR.AVTAR SINGH “TEXTBOOK ON THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT”, 2ND

EDITION, REPRINT (2012).

WEBLINKS

[1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/license
[2] http://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/bareacts/indianencasements/62.php?Title=In
dian%20Encasements%20Act,%201882&STitle=License%20when%20deemed%2
0revoked
[3] https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/definition-license/
[4] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/539437/