LAWS(BOM)-2020-5-44

MANHARLAL TRIKAMDAS MODY Vs. MANHARLAL TRIKAMDAS MODY

Decided On May 22, 2020
Manharlal Trikamdas Mody Appellant
V/S
MANHARLAL TRIKAMDAS MODY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This chamber summons is taken out by defendants in suit No. 2356 of 2006 and the plaintiff to the counterclaim No. 33 of 2008 seeking permission to amend the written statement and the counterclaim so as to bring the subsequent events on the record of the Court, which according to the defendants, bear upon the fate of the suit and counter claim.

(2.) The background facts necessary for the determination of this chamber summons can be summarized as under :

(3.) The defendants have resisted the claim by filing written statement. The defendants have contested the entitlement of the plaintiff to interest on the amount of the security deposit. The defendant Nos.1 and 2, on the contrary, contend that the plaintiff was not desirous of vacating the suit property despite the expiry of the license period and had requested the defendant Nos.1 and 2 to allow the plaintiff to occupy the suit property beyond the said period. The plaintiff's occupation of the suit property beyond the licence period is not governed by the provisions of the leave and license agreement. The defendants have also filed a counter claim and sought a declaration that the plaintiff is not entitled to retain possession of the suit property and has no right, title or interest therein. That the use and occupation of the suit property by the plaintiff is unlawful. The defendant Nos.1 and 2 have also sought declaration that clause 28 of the agreement is illegal, unconstitutional, invalid, null and void and the provisions of said clause 28 do not bind the defendant Nos.1 and 2. A consequential relief of vacant peaceful possession of the suit property is also sought by the defendant Nos. 1 and 2.