SHAHNAVAZ BEGUM Vs. POTINA SRINIVASA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters patent is against the judgment of Bhimasankaram, J. affirming that of the Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada in Appeal No. 17 of 1955.

(2.) The facts culminating in this appeal lie in a short compass and may be staled as follows. A vacant sitemeasuring 1060 sq. yards situate in the heart of Vijayawada town and belonging to one Syed Abdul Khayum Saheb and his brother was leased out to one Motey Narayana Rao of Elirru in 1922 for seven years for the purpose of erecting a theatre on the site. It was provided in the lease deed that after the expiry of the lease, the theatre should be dismantled and the vacant site delivered back to the lessor. There was a term in the lease deed to the effect that the brick walls constructed by the lessee of few months before the lease started with the permission of the lessors should be relinquished in favour of the lessors; Somelime In the year 1929, the present respondent purchased the superstructure erected by Motey Narayana Rao and obtained a lease of the land from the owners thereof This was followed by a subsequent lease from Khayum Sahib, who had by then become the sole owner of the property, on 8-7-1930 for a period of ten years and marked as Ex. B-1. This lease provided a rent of Rs. 50.00 per month. It was inter alia stipulated between the parties that the lessor would have the right to the brick compound wall on the northern and western sides with the doors and door-ways and the gable wall situate on the-southern side of the site and that the theatre should be removed by the lessee at the end of the period at his expense. The further provisions of the lease, which has a material bearing on this enquiry, may be translated thus:

(3.) On the termination of this lease on 8-7-1940, the lessor instead of taking possession of the property let It out for a further period of ten years to the respondent under Ex. B-2. As the controversy ranges over some ot-the terms of this deed, we will do well to extract the material clauses of the deed. A. The second party previously took on lease the schedule mentioned vacant site till 8-7-1940. From the expiration of the said lease, It arranged that 2nd party should take on lease for a further period of ten years till 8-7-1950. At present the second party is still in possession without objection. B. xx xx xx xx xx C. The second party shall pay a rent of Rs, 75/- at the end of every month, and in default it is also agreed to pay interest at the rate of 0-8-0 per cent per month The second party shall take a receipt for each months rent paid at the end of each month. The second party shall deduct Rs. 900.00 from the rent payable for the fast year of the lease without interest. D. Immediately on the expiration of the lease on 8-7-1950, the second party shall deliver possession of the Immovable property without the necessity for any notice from the first party. E. XX XX XX XX F. In the schedule mentioned site there is the cabin room on the northern side. Under the cabin room, there are three rooms. There is an agreement that at the end of the lease period, the second party shall hand over the Said rooms without objection. That apart, it is agreed that the second party should deliver possession of the western and northern compound walls, with the doors and doorways etc. The gable wall on the south also belongs to the first party at the end of the lease period. The schedule annexed to the lease deed describes only the vacant site but does not mention either the walls on the western or the northern sides or the cabin and the rooms adjoining it.