As per case facts, the appellant, a tenant operating a petrol bunk, faced eviction after the expiry of his lease. The landlord sought to cancel the appellant's permission for petroleum ... storage and revoke the No Objection Certificate, eventually filing a writ of mandamus for non-renewal of the appellant's license, contending the appellant had lost all rights to the site. The appellant asserted he was a tenant holding over and a statutory tenant with lawful possession, arguing that the landlord's acceptance of rent post-lease expiry established a new tenancy. The High Court and Division Bench ruled in favor of the landlord, prompting this appeal. The question arose whether the term "right to the site" under Rule 153(1) of the Petroleum Rules, 1976, encompassed mere possession or required a valid legal right, and if the landlord's acceptance of rent after lease termination created a new or statutory tenancy. Finally, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that "right to the site" signifies a legal right, not just juridical possession. It clarified that continued occupation after lease expiry, even with the landlord accepting payments, does not establish a new tenancy if the landlord has expressed an intention to terminate. The Court concluded that occupation without consent is wrongful and that the appellant was not a statutory tenant, as the lease was for a vacant site and not covered by the Rent Control Act.