HUMAYUN DHANRAJGIR Vs. EZRA ABOODY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both chamber summonses are directed against the order passed by the Court Receiver dated 30th November 1980 fixing monthly royalty at the rate of Rs. 3,70,000/- in respect of the premises being Flat No. 34/34-A in Block-F, Dhanraj Mahal, situated at C.S.M. Road, Appollo Bunder, Mumbai 400 039 (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property"), around which the entire dispute revolves.

(2.) The factual matrix reveals that on 1st March, 2002, inter alia; two agreements were entered into between the plaintiffs and the defendant of which one was leave and licence agreement. By the said agreement, the defendant was permitted to occupy the suit property/flat as a licensee for three years. By the other agreement of the same date, an option to purchase the said suit property/ flat was given to the defendant. The said agreement, inter alia; provides the time by which the option to purchase could be exercised by the defendant. The defendant claims to have exercised the said option after expiry of 18 months of the leave and license agreement and before six months therefrom, vide letter dated 23rd August 2004. On the other hand, plaintiffs contend that the defendant was not entitled to exercise the said option due to breaches committed by him.

(3.) According to plaintiffs, breaches committed by the defendant were communicated by them to the defendant vide letter dated 2nd September 2004. According to the plaintiffs, by their letter dated 2nd September, 2004 they allowed the defendants to exercise the said option, subject to compliance of the terms and conditions mentioned therein. Plaintiffs are alleging breach of the said terms and conditions contained in the letter dated 2nd September, 2004.