BALVANTSINGJI ANAND Vs. BHAGWANTRAO GANPATRAO DESHMUKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though this Writ Petition is directed against a finding which appears to be concurrent finding regarding the nature of right had by the petitioner in the suit premises, I have found it necessary to examine the same in details and upon the examination I have no other option but to come to the conclusion that the ultimate finding cannot be sustained.

(2.) Prima facie the question appears to be very simple. By an agreement purported to be one of leave and licence dated 31-5-1969, the respondent allowed the petitioner to continue the use of the suit premises, which consists of a portion of open land for a period of 320 days. That licence was terminated by a notice dated 21-3-1970. I am told that thereafter the respondent has even filed a suit for recovery of possession of the said land. I am told that it is Spl. Civil Suit No. 69 of 1977, but long before that on 8-9-1971, the petitioner filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel, and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act 1947 (hereinafter 'the Rent Act') for fixation of standard rent of the suit premises contending that the rent of Rs. 3680/ charged for the contractual period which in turn amounted to Rs. 368 for 32 days was excessive rent.

(3.) Both the Courts below have recorded a concurrent finding that relationship evidenced by the said written agreement dated 31-5-1969 (Ex. 71) was not the relationship of a landlord and a tenant and that the right that was given to the petitioner pursuant to the said agreement was only in the nature of leave and licence. The application for fixation of the standard rent has been, therefore, dismissed by both the Court below, since at the relevant time no licensee had any right for getting a standard rent fixed at hands of the Court under the provisions of the Rent Act.