SURESH MADHUKAR NAGARKAR Vs. UJUBALA MADHAV DESAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9th December, 1987, passed by the City Civil Court, Bombay in S. C. Suit No. 6958 of 1972.

(2.) GIST facts of the suit are that, the plaintiff Dr. Madhav Dattatraya Desai (Dead) was a General Medical Practitioner running a dispensary in the name and style of National Medical Hall at Shop No. 1. Bai Panabai Gangji Building, Ground floor, Lalbag, Bombay-12. The plaintiff was a monthly tenant of the said premises. The appellant-defendant Dr. Suresh Madhukar Nagarkar is a qualified Dental Surgeon. It is the case of the plaintiff that Dr. Madhav Desai and Dr. Suresh Nagarkar, defendant-appellant entered into an agreement of leave and licence on 18th November, 1968. Under the agreement,, the appellant-defendant was allowed to use a small portion of premises on leave and licence basis. The royalty or licence fee was fixed at Rs. 380/- p. m. , payable on 10th day of each succeeding month. In the agreement, the terms and conditions were laid down. The defendant licensee should use the said accommodation and the said facilities granted to him in a manner so as not to cause inconvenience and obstruction or loss or damage as a result of any act or omission on his part. In breach of terms and conditions, the agreement also provides the termination of leave and licence agreement before the expiry of the agreed period The agreed terms were as follows:-

(3.) IT is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant-licensee has failed to pay the licence fee, royalty or the compensation at the rate of Rs. 380/- as agreed in the agreement for a period from 18th November, 1968 to 17th June, 1972 and he was in arrears of aggregating to Rs. 15, 960/ -. On account of demand of this arrears, it is stated that the defendant-licensee had an inimical feelings and had started behaving in such a way so as to cause obstructions to the plaintiff and jeopardize the tenancy right of the plaintiff. It is stated that the defendant-licensee was given permission by the plaintiff-licensor to set up a small reservoir or a water tank for his Dental Clinic in the premises of the said National Medical Hall. It was agreed between the plaintiff and the defendant that the said tank was to be set up with necessary Municipal permission that before putting the said tank, the defendant was to obtain necessary permission from the B. M. C. but he set up a water tank without B. M. C. permission. Therefore, a notice was issued to the plaintiff by the B. M. C. for unauthorised construction. Further, it is stated that with a view to annoying the plaintiff, the defendant was will fully keeping the said premises open much beyond the business hours. Despite repeated requests, the defendant continued to keep the Dental Clinic open during the night time also. Therefore, the plaintiff by notice dated 12th April, 1944, terminated the leave and licence agreement. It is submitted that on receiving the notice, the defendant become more aggressive and belligerent towards the plaintiff. He put up a big sign board above the door of the said premises and he shifted the original sign board of the plaintiff to one side of the National Medical Hall. Not only that, but he has made an allegation against the plaintiff that the plaintiff had given proposal for marriage with Ujbala and as the defendant rejected the proposal, the plaintiff finds false excuses with the defendant. Hence the suit was filed against the defendant for ejectment of possession. In the written statement, the defendant has denied the allegation and has contended that the plaintiff has filed false suit because he refused the offer of the plaintiff to marry with Ujbala.