ANANTHASUBRAMANIAM JAGADESAN Vs. T V PARWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this petition relates to a room situated on the 5th floor, bearing Room No. 507 in Commerce House, Medows Street, Fort Bombay. It is needless to say that the premises in dispute are situated in the heart of city as well as business locality. It is no more in dispute that the petitioner is the tenant member of the Association of the Commerce House Block Owners Limited and he has purchased the suit premises sometime in the year 1958 for Rs. 13,000/-. The area of this suit premises is about 300 sq. ft.

(2.) The main question that falls for consideration in this petition relates to the construction of document dated June 1, 1964 which is titled as Leave and Licence Agreement-hereinafter referred to as "the document". It is also common ground that the respondent was put in possession of the suit premises first time under the said document. The licence fee charged for the use and occupation of the suit premises is Rs. 550/- per month. According to the petitioner the document dated June 1, 1964 is an agreement of leave and licence simple, whereas according to the respondent the said document was camouflaged as a licence, and the parties never intended to act upon it and the real intention between the parties was to have the relationship of landlord and tenant. The petitioner revoked the licence by his notice dated May, 15, 1965 and called upon the respondent to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the suit premises. Since the respondent failed to comply with the said notice sometime in March, 1966, the petitioner made an application under section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Act, 1882 (Act XV of 1982) hereinafter called "the Act" for possession of the suit premises. The said application is annexed to this petition at page 30.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioners that under the document dated June 1, 1964, the respondent was put in possession as the licensee for the period of 11 months and said period expired on April, 30, 1965. The petitioner did not renew the leave and licence agreement. The licence came to be revoked by notice dated May 15, 1965, and therefore, he is entitled for possession of the suit premises.