KISHAN CHAND ARORA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of this application are briefly as follows: One Prafulla Kumar Mitra is tenant of premises No. 2, Chowringhee Road, Calcutta, wherein he runs a Hotel called the 'Bristol Hotel'. In October 1953, he sub-let the ground floor of the said premises to the Respondent No. 2 Haripada Bhowmick as a monthly tenant. The said Haripada Bhowmick was carrying on the business of an eating house therein, known as the 'Kalpataru Cafeteria.' The running of such an eating house requires the grant of a license by the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta under Section 39 of the Calcutta Police Act 1866 read with Section 6(2) of Bengal Act V of 1909 and Section 3 of Act VII of 1912. Bhowmick had taken out such a license. Section 39 of the Calcutta Police Act 1866 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') runs as follows:

(2.) The last license taken out on behalf of Bhowmick expired on 31-3-1955. After the expiry thereof, no application was made for renewal for several months, but the petitioner went on carrying on the business of the Cafeteria as if no license was required. He says that he did so by an 'oversight,' an excuse which I am unable to accept as true. On 30-8-1955 an application was lodged for a license. It was signed by Bhowmick but forwarded to the Commissioner by the petitioner. In September 1955 a prosecution was launched against Bhomick for carrying on the Cafeteria without a license and he was fined Rs. 5/- on 12-12-1955. In June 1956, a letter was received by the Deputy Commissioner Head Quarters, from the Health Officer District III of the Corporation of Calcutta, to the effect that no health license had been granted to either Kissenchand Arora or Jagadish Lall in respect of the Kalpataru Cafeteria. It is not clear who Lall is. The agreement enables the petitioner to associate other people to work with him and this is perhaps how he came into the picture. The license of Bhowmick was not renewed, but this did not deter the petitioner from carrying on the Cafeteria without a license. Indeed, he is doing so even now. On 7-9-1956, a notice was issued upon Bhowmick by the Deputy Commissioner, Head Quarters, asking him to show cause why license in respect of the Kalpataru Cafeteria should not be refused to him inasmuch as he had violated Clause 5 of the license by having leased out' the same to Kisanchand Arora. This notice appears to have been served by affixation upon the Cafeteria and brought matters to a head. On 21-9-1956 the petitioner wrote to the Deputy Commissioner of Police praying for a license to be issued in his own name, saying that he was a subtenant in respect of portion of 2 Chowringhee Road occupied by the Cafeteria under Prafulla Kumar Mitra. Referring to the agreement dated 11-8-1954, he said:

(3.) What does this confession really mean? Deba Prosad Gooptu is the owner of Premises No. 2 Chowringhee Road; Prafulla Kumar Mitra is his tenant. In respect of the ground floor Prafulla Kumar Mitra sub-let it to Bhowmick and now the petitioner says that Prafulla Kumar Mitra sub-let it to the petitioner and the document of 11-8-1954 was a benami and collusive document. This surprising stand is further elucidated by the Petitioner's letter dated 21-5-1957 to the Deputy Commissioner which inter alia states as follows: