NISHA Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the owner/landlady of the suit property bearing No. XVI 10203, Karol Bagh, Padam Singh Road, New Delhi, The building in which the suit premises is situate is known as "Jamuna House". Suit premises comprises of entire basement i.e. one hall and toilet measuring 3659 sq. feet and containing carpet area of 3570 sq. feet. The premises was let out by the appellant/plaintiff to the New Bank of India Ltd. Vide lease agreement dated 18th August, 1991. Initial period of lease was five years and the rate of rent was Rs. 6.00 per sq.feet for total carpet area of 3570 sq.feet which comes to Rs. 21,420.00 per month. In case of renewal of lease, lease agreement provided for enhancement of rent by 15 per cent over the agreed rate of rent. Defendant was allowed to construct a strong room in the lease premises. After the expiry of five years, the lease was renewed for another period of five years i.e. w.e.f. 18th August, 1986 to 17th August, 1991. This was done vide plaintiffs letter dated 9th June, 1987. This letter for renewal was accepted by defendant and rent was enhanced to Rs. 24,633.00 Few months before the expiry of extended period of lease, plaintiff wrote letter dated 3rd June, 1991 to the defendant informing that tenancy was coming to an end by midnight of 17th August, 1991 and further that plaintiff would be proceeding to adjust the first three months from the advance rent which plaintiff had retained as per terms and conditions of lease dated 18th August, 1991. After the expiry of lease period, defendant sent two cheques for Rs. 24,633.00 each. However, plaintiff returned those cheque, Plaintiff also refused to accede to the request of the defendant for renewal of lease deed by letter dated 13th June, 1991. She also asked the defendant to vacate the premises by letter dated 17th August, 1991 when lease period was coming to an end. As the defendant did not vacate the premises, plaintiff served a legal notice dated 3rd January, 1992. Defendant sent reply dated 17th January, 1992. As the plaintiff found some technical defect in the earlier notice, fresh notice dated 12th February, 1992 was again served upon the defendants. Defendant replied to this notice as well. Plaintiff thereafter filed suit for possession against the said defendant, New Bank of India Ltd.

(2.) New Bank of India Ltd. contested the suit by filing written statement. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit, the New Bank of India Ltd. was merged with the Punjab National Bank by means of notification issued by Central Government and all the assets and liabilities were taken over by the Punjab National Bank. In these circumstance, plaintiff moved application under Order 1 Rule 10 readwith Section 151 Civil Procedure Code for impleading Punjab National Bank as defendant in place of New Bank of India Ltd. This application was allowed by orders dated 7th January, 1994 by directing that name of New Bank of India Ltd. be substituted with Punjab National Bank. Amended memo of parties filed by the plaintiff was taken on record and the suit proceeded against Punjab National Bank which is respondent herein.

(3.) On 6th September, 1995 following issues were framed: