PRADIP KR. SENGUPTA Vs. CALCUTTA IMPROVEMENT TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ application is directed against a notice dated 30.10.96 as contained in Annexure 'F' to the writ application whereby and whereunder the respondent No. 3 refused to extend the period of licence/lease. This Court, in the facts and circumstances of this case, although contentions have been raised at the Bar, does not consider it necessary to decide as to whether the Agreement is governed under the provision of the West Bengal Premises (Tenancy Regulation) Act, 1976 or not.

(2.) HOWEVER there cannot be any doubt that the petitioner cannot be evicted forcibly.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Parvatibai Subhanrao Nalawade v. Anwarali Hasanali Makani reported in AIR 1992 SC 1780. In that case the Supreme Court was considering a civil dispute between the parties arising out of a consent decree. In that case the tenant vacated the premises on express stipulation of the landlord that on construction of a new building the tenant would get identical area therein. The Apex Court observed that the landlord should honour the pledge given in the form of an undertaking. As there was a dispute as regard identification of a particular area in the building, the Apex Court remitted the matter back to the executing Court. The Apex Court however observed :-