LAWS(MAD)-2000-10-55

N R VAIRAMANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On October 20, 2000
N.R. VAIRAMANI Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 27.10.1999, passed in W.P.No. 17370 of 1999, dismissing the writ petition with the observation that it is for the writ petitioner to take appropriate proceedings before the appropriate Court, to evict respondents 2 and 3.

(2.) IT is alleged that on 1.4.1958, by way of a lease deed, the disputed property was leased out by the writ petitioner in favour of M/s.Burma Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Co., of India Ltd., for a period of 20 years. The currency of lease was expired on 31.8.1978. The writ petitioner has decided not to grant any further lease, and wanted to put up a building on the said property. IT is further alleged that since the undertaking was transferred and vested with the Central Government, the petitioner on 22.9.1977 sent a registered letter to the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., requesting to vacate the premises by the expiry of lease on 31.8.1978, since she was not willing to extend the lease, and in view of her proposed construction in the said property. But the respondents 2 and 3 did not vacate the premises, rather replied on 7.10.1977 stating that they are not willing to vacate the premises, and as per Sections 5 and 7 of the Burmah Shell (Acquisition of Undertaking in India) Act, 1976 (herein after referred to as the Act) the writ petitioner is bound to renew the lease for a further period of 20 years on the existing rent of Rs.110 per mensem. Thereafter, the writ petitioner sent a letter on 18.1.1978 requesting to surrender the vacant site, but the same was answered negativing the request in the similar terms of the earlier reply. Hence, the writ petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.2691 of 1978 for declaring Section 5 of the Act, which was subsequently dismissed. Though the lease period expired on 1.6.1998, the respondents on 9.1.1998 issued notice for continuance of occupation for a further period of 20 years from 1.6.1998. Challenging the same, W.P.No. 17370 of 1999 has been filed. The learned Single Judge, on consideration, dismissed the writ petition. Against that, the present writ appeal has been filed.