BADRILAL vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF INDORE

The Supreme Court held that no contract was concluded between the appellant and the respondent-Corporation under Section 80 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, as the Commissioner lacked authority to enter into a contract without municipal council sanction. The Court ruled that the appellant, having failed to comply with the terms of the resolution and only making a counter-offer, could not be considered a tenant holding over but rather a tenant by sufferance, thus negating the need for notice prior to eviction. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decree in favor of the Corporation.