CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BIHAR

PANCHANPUR-824236

THE TRANSFER OF THE PROPERTY ACT WITH EASEMENT ACT

REVOCATION AND EVICTION OF LICENCE

Under the Supervision of – Dr. Pallavi Singh

Assisstant Professor,
School of Law & Governance,
Central University of South Bihar

Submitted By -
PIYUSH ANAND
B.A. LL. B (Hons.) – 5th Semester
Enrolment No. - CUSB1713125027
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research work is a culmination of efforts of lots of people who give their intense support
and helped me in the completion of this project.
First, I am very grateful to my teacher Dr.
PALLAVI SINGH, whose guidance and advice helped me in completing my project. She
explained the topic clearly and helped me proceed in my project work. I would also like to
thank her for his valuable suggestions towards the making of the project.
I am highly indebted to
my parents and friends for their co-operation and encouragement which helped me in
completion of this project.
Lastly, I would like to thank my grandparents for their constant support and
faith in me, which motivated me to concentrate on my project and to complete it in time.
I thank all of them!

TABLE OF CONTENT

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ......................................................................3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...........................................................................................3

1
HYPOTHESIS ...................................................................................................................... 3
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................4
2. LICENSE WHEN REVOCABLE .....................................................................................5
2.1 Clause (a) .........................................................................................................................5
2.2 Clause (b) .........................................................................................................................6
2.3 Licensee’s Remedy Against Improper Revocation .........................................................7
2.4 Other sections related to revocation ................................................................................7
3. LICENSEE’s RIGHTS ON EVICTION………………………………………………...9
3.1Essential of this section………………………………………………………………...10
3.2 Forceful Eviction of Licence……………………………………………………….….10
3.3Right of Licensee…………………………………………………………………..…..10
4. CONCLUSION ...............................................................................................................11
REFERENCE…......................................................................................................12

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STDY

● The researcher wants to study the various laws on license in India.
● The researcher aims to explain the revocation of Licence in India.
● The researcher also aims to differentiate the laws on revocation in India and England.
● The researcher wants to study the various cases related to revocation of Licence.

2
 ● The researcher also aims to explain the eviction of licence of India.
●

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The researcher will do a doctrinal type of research in which he will study and work on the
primary as well as the secondary sources. The researcher through this method will go through
case laws, books, articles and various legal works on revocation of licence. The researcher will,
therefore, try to from a clear picture of the topic. The doctrinal method will help in doing a
comparative study of the topic. This methodology helps in going through many works and
cases in less time. This will also help in getting a bird's eye view of the subject. Emphasis will
be laid on differential diagnosis of the topic through various case laws.

HYPOTHESIS
The researcher presumes that the laws for the Revocation and Eviction of licence in the Indian
Easement Act, 1882 are justified.

1. INTRODUCTION
SECTION 52 of the Indian Easement Act, 1882, defines licence as when a person is
granted a right to which he does not have, in or upon an immovable property of the granter, to
do or continue to do something, doing of which in absence of the grant would be illegal, which
is neither easement or an interest in the property.
Under Section 60 of the Indian Easement Act, 1882, talks about revocation of
licence means repeal of licence.

3
Clause (a) and clause (b) are not exhaustive; parties by agreement can make license irrevocable
even if it is not covered by clause (a) or clause (b). In Panchu Gopal Barua v. Umesh Chandra
Goswami1, held that through the Indian Easement Act had no application to State of West
Bengal, the High Court only apply the principles of justice, equity and good conscience in
deciding to which the said Act were to be applied.
Section 64 of the Indian Easement Act, 1882, talks about Eviction of licence. It means
that any licence has been granted for any consideration and grantor evicts the licensee before
full enjoyment of those right, the licensee can get damages from him.

2. LICENCE WHEN REVOCABLE

Revocation of a licence is enumerated in Section 60 of the Indian Easement
Act. It states that:
A licence may be revoked by the grantor, unless-
(a) It is coupled with a transfer of property and such transfer is in force;
(b) The licensee, acting upon the license, has executed a work of a permanent
character and incurred expenses in the execution.
Where intention of the parties was never to create irrevocable license in the favour of plaintiff,
the permission granted to him to use roof top and garden but not as tendancy rights would be

1
AIR 1997 SC 1041

4
revocable. Under Section 60 of this Act, a license becomes irrevocable when it is coupled with
a Transfer of Property Act and the transfer is enforced and when the licensee has executed a
work of permanent character and incurred expenses in such execution2.
Where revocation of the license is challenged on the ground that the licensee had executed
work of permanent character and incurred expenditure therein, the work executed must be
within specifications fixed by the Government. If the lessees had given up their easementary
right in the agreement then they could not claim license as irrevocable.
A license can be revoked by the grantor at any time and it is not necessary to give opportunity
of hearing to the licensee for revoking the license where it was not coupled with transfer of
property nor was the licensee permitted by the grantor to execute work of permanent character3.
Where a license coupled with the grant of interest in the nature of property and it could be
inferred from the conduct of the parties that the license was not given for temporary occupation
it would be irrevocable one.

2.1 Clause (a)

The first of the two tests of irrevocability laid down in this section is obviously narrower than
the corresponding test laid down in the English cases. In order to be irrevocable under this
section, a license has to be coupled with a transfer of property whereas under the English law
it is enough if it is coupled with a grant or interest in the nature of property. The liberalised
principles adopted by the English Courts have not, therefore, to be applied to cases to which
the Act applies.
Clause (a) of this section lays down one exception to the general rule that a license is revocable,
and enacts that a license may be revoked by the grantor unless it is coupled with a transfer of
property and such transfer is in force. According to the canons interpretation the exception is
to receive a strict and narrow construction and, therefore, unless the license is coupled with a
transfer of property, in the proper sense of the pression, it can be revoked.
A transfer of property in send of Chapter VI of the Indian Easement Act necessarily refers to
an interest in immovable property. Moreover, giving the right to use the furniture and stock-
in-trade does not amount of transfer. At the most it would be permission or license to use the
furniture and stock-in-trade4.

2
Mini Peter Philips v. Dina J.S Fanibanda, 2007 (4) Bom CR 526
3
Purnima Pandey v. Chief Medical Superintendent, AIR 2003 All 57
4
Jagannath v Jayantilal, AIR 1980 Guj 4

5
2.2 CLAUSE (b)
The irrevocability of license enumerated in clause (b) of this section is based on principles
similar to those on which estoppel arises against a person from revoking grant, after the grantee
acting on the grant, had acted to his own detriment. Consequently, a licensee making permanent
land whenever asked is precluded from pleading irrevocability. A license is irrevocable, if a
work of a permanent character has been executed. To such a case, section 64 does not apply5.
Generally, a license is revocable at the Will of the grantor as no interest in the land is is
conferred by a license. When it is found as a fact that a person was in occupation under a power
of attorney granted by the owner and the document was intended to be acted upon and was in
fact acted upon, the argument for irrevocable license does not survive for consideration. If the
attorney has built some permanent structure on the land of the owner, it cannot be said that he
has done so acting upon the licensee as required by section 60 (b) of the Easements Act.
As he claim to be a tenant and that he would become a statutory purchaser of the land or an
alleged oral agreement of sale will one fine day be implemented, the execution of work of a
permanent character would therefore in his capacity as a tenant or a prospective purchaser and
not in his capacity as a licensee. It constitutes the second exception to the rule that a license is
revocable at the instance of the licensor. The Court may, in such cases, grant a relief of
revocation to the licensor on condition of his praying the expenses incurred by the licensee,
where the equities of the case demand search course to be we adopted; but each case must be
decided on its own merits6
Where the case of the plaintiff is that the room was given on license to the
defendant. Even if it is is accepted that the defendant made the roof of the room partly pucca
and partly by placing thatch, it would not amount to raising permanent structure acting upon
the license rendering it irrevocable.

2.3 Licensee's Remedy Against Improper Revocation

A bare license may be revoked at the instance of the licensor at any time he likes. And it is true
that there is no provision in sections 60, 61, 63 or 64 for the issue of any notice, as in the the
case of leases before a license can be revoked.
Similarly, where a license is granted for valuable consideration and
before the Licensee has had full enjoyment of it, it is revoked in breach of an express or implied

5
Hafiz Mansoor Ahmed v Mohammad Abdul Jamir, ILR 56 All 207
6
Kesava Pillai v. Peddu Reddit, 1 Mad HC 258

6
contract, the Licensee's remedy lies only in an action for damages for breach of contract or
implied covenant not to revoke. If the obstruction in the enjoyment of a bare license is laid not
by the licensor, but by a third party the licensee may not sure in his own name for the removal
of such obstruction7.
A bare license does not create such an estate or interest in the land as to enable a licensee to
maintain an action in his own name against a third person for the infringement of his right. He
must obtain permission from the licensor to sue the wrong-doer in his name in such cases. The
mere fact that the license is an exclusive license makes no difference, unless the wrong-doer
has notice of its being exclusive.

2.4 Other Section Related To Revocation

● Section 61, Indian Easement Act, states that;The revocation of a licence may be
express or implied.
It means that no particular words are necessary to constitute express revocation, so no particular
acts are necessary to constitute implied revocation. In either case, it is sufficient if the words
or acts, which are pleaded as constituting an express or implied revocation, indicate clearly and
unequivocally the licensor's intention to withdraw the licence or its being inconsistent with the
continued exercise thereof. For instance, where there is a Licence to open ventilators in a
demised building and the assignee of the lessor builds on the adjoining land totally obstructing
these ventilators, it is sufficient to constitute implied revocation8.
ILLUSTRATION:
(a) A, the owner of a field, grants a licence to B, to use a path across it. A, with intent to
revoke the licence, locks a gate across the path. The licence is revoked.
(b) A, the owner of a field, grants a licence to B to stack hay on the field. A lets or sells the
field to C. The licence is revoked.
In Siddama v. Geetha9, it has been held that the licence may be revoked either expressly
impliedly and the licence gets terminated 'ipso facto' on the expiry of the period of agreement.
● Section 62, states that; A licence 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 licence; (b) when the licensee releases it, expressly or

7
Hill v Tupper, 8 LT 792
8
Wallis v Harrison, 4 M&W 538 (544)
9
(1983) 2 Civ. L.J. 445.

7
 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 condition is fulfilled; (d)
where the property affected by the licence 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
licence;(f) where the licence is granted for a specified purpose and the purpose is
attained, or abandoned, or becomes impracticable;(g) where the licence 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 licence 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 licence,
when the interest or right to which it is accessory ceases to exist.
Under this section nine circumstances have been described in which licence will be deemed to
be repealed. Licensee shall be deemed to be repealed on the existence of any one of these
circumstances.
Section 63 recognized that, where a licence is revoked, the licensee is entitled to a
reasonable time to leave the property affected thereby and to remove any goods. Section 64
recognized the right of the Licensee, when he was evicted without any fault of his by the grantor
before he has fully enjoyed, under the licence, the right which he was granted, to recover
compensation from the grantor, for the breach of the grant.
This section is in two parts. First part is related with revocation by licensor and second
part is related with revocation by law.
● Section 63 discusses the Licensee's Right On Revocation
Where a licence is revoked, the Licensee is entitled to a reasonable time to leave the
property affected thereby and to remove any goods which he has been allowed to place
on such property.
Under this section mere licence is revocable at any moment at the instance of the licensor, the
provisions made by this section and the next one is very salutary to safeguard the interests of
the licensee from being jeopardized by a mere frivolous or vexations exercise of his right of
revocation by the licensor. According to this section the Licensee is entitled to a reasonable
time (a) to leave the property affected thereby;and (b) to remove any goods which he has been
allowed to place on such property.

8
 The reasonable time will be reckoned from the moment the licensee has
notice of such revocation. It is, therefore, necessary that he must have a reasonable notice of
such revocation before he must prepare to leave the place and remove his goods.
Where licence is revoked by operation of law, the licensee must be prepared to leave the
property and remove his goods. And he will be presumed to have notice of such time on the
principle 'ignorantia juris non excusat'.

3. LICENSEE'S RIGHTS ON EVICTION

Eviction of a license is enumerated in Section 64 of the Indian Easement Act, 1882. It states
that:
Where a licence has been granted for a consideration, and the licensee, without any fault
of his own, is evicted by the grantor before he has fully enjoyed, under the licence, the
right for which he contracted, he is entitled to recover compensation from the grantors.
Like Section 63 under this section also safely provisions have been made for a licensee.
Under section 64 has been provided that where any licence
has been granted for any consideration and grantor evicts the licensee before full enjoyment of
those rights, the licensee can get damages from him.
In a case10 arising under Rent Control Act it has been hold
that licensee is also entitled to get this allowance provided it is shown that licensee has really
made repair and spent money.
3.1 Essential of This Section
(a) licence is granted for a consideration;
(b) grantor has illegally evicted the licensee;
(c) such eviction has been made before the completion of enjoyment;
(d) such eviction has been made by the grantor himself.
3.2 Forceful Eviction Of Licensee
Under Section 64 even if a licensee is evicted through grounds
for revocation of licence does not exist or forcefully evicted, his only remedy is to
recover compensation from grantor and not to resume occupation. This undoubtedly
would never mean that a licensee can be forcefully evicted by the grantor without
taking recourse to the provisions of law11.

3.3 Right Of Licensee- Whose Licence Has Been Revoked

10
M/s Hind Trading & Manufacturing Co. v. M/s Didi Modes Pvt. Ltd., A.I.R. 1993 Del. 301.
11
The Corporation of Calicut v. K. Sreenivasan, A.I.R. 2002 S.C. 2051.

9
 The Apex Court in The Corporation of Calicut v. K. Sreenivasan12, has held that
the rights of a licensee, whose licence has been revoked in accordance with law, to remain in
occupation of the property for a reasonable time after it's revocation, have been enumerated in
Section 63. Under Section 64 if a licensee is evicted, when grounds for revocation of licence
do not exist or forcefully evicted, his only remedy is to recover compensation from grantor and
not to resume occupation which undoubtedly would never mean that a licensee can be
forcefully evicted by the grantor without taking recourse to the provisions of law.
The Apex Court observed that 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 a licence.

4. CONCLUSION

Property is perhaps the most important and the most complicated and extensive branch of
modern law. Under this field of law, the rights, claims, duties and obligations of the parties
involved with any kind of property become the subject of study.
Earlier, licence was described as the fact that a landowner communicated his consent to
another’s using his land; while at other times licence was described the legal relationship
whereby the other could use the land without being liable for trespass. In present times, licence
is referred to as a validation by the owner of the land for the acts of the licensee which would
otherwise be committed unlawfully.
The traditional concepts of “bare” or “mere” licenses, licenses “coupled with an interest” or
“with a grant,” licenses “acted upon” or “executed,” and licenses “upon valuable
consideration” were used earlier. Most of these concepts assumed certain differences in the
legal consequences of various transactions, and therefore furnished a poor starting point for
determining what the legal consequences of a given transaction should be. It also made it easy
to overlook important license transactions which these phrases did not suggest.

12
A.I.R. 2002 S.C. 2051.

10
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.

11
 REFERENCE
B.B. Katiyar. 2017. Law of Easements and Licenses, 16th Edition. LexisNexis.

Anindita Ganguli. Law of Easements and Licences, 4th Edition. Eastern Law House.

J.D. Jain.2017. Indian Easement Act. Allahabad Law Agency.

BOOK:
The Transfer of Property Act with Easements Act, Prof. A.K. Srivastava, First Edition, 2014.

12