ABL INTERNATIONAL LTD Vs. DURGAPUR PROJECTS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Sudera Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. instituted this suit on September 16, 1992 when the plaint was presented and admitted, and leave under Order 2, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was granted. Sudera prayed for decrees for recovery of the suit property, past and future mesne profits, and Rs.9,07,246.29 for air conditioning.

(2.) Case stated in the plaint is this. Under a registered instrument dated February 22, 1969 Sudera leased out the suit premises to the defendant for twenty-one years commencing March 1, 1969. The suit property compromises a floor area of 12,108 square feet on the first floor of 1, Shakespeare Sarani, Calcutta. The agreement provided that the defendant would pay rent, service charges, air conditioning charges; that it would have the right to terminate the lease, by giving three months' notice, after expiration of eight years; that on expiration of twenty-one years it would put Sudera into possession of the suit property. By agreement of parties the rate for air conditioning was increased from time to time. The lease determined on March 1 or 2, 1990 by efflux of time limited thereby. Inspite of determination of the lease the defendant failed and neglected to put Sudera into possession of the suit property. It wrongfully contended that it was entitled to protection against eviction provided by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 - an Act not applicable to the tenancy. Even if the provisions of the Act are" applicable to the tenancy, on the ground of default, reasonable requirement, etc. Sudera is entitled to a decree for recovery of the suit property. For the period from March 1,1990 to August 31,1992 Sudera is entitled to mesne profits at the reasonable rate of Rs. 12,340.20 per day. The defendant is also liable to pay Rs.9,07,246.29 for air conditioning for the period from March 1, 1990 to August 31, 1992.

(3.) The defendant entered appearance and filed its written statement dated March 8, 1994 on May 6, 1994. Case stated in the written statement is this. The lease created by the instrument dated February 22, 1969 conferred on it a right to terminate it, by giving three months' notice, after expiration of eight years, and hence it was not a lease for twenty-one years. The provisions of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 were applicable to the tenancy from its very inception, since it was terminable after eight years at its option. Rate for air conditioning was increased according to relevant provisions of the agreement creating the lease. It is not correct that the tease is for twenty-one years or that it determined on or after March 1 or 2, 1990. The amount claimed for air conditioning from March, 1990 is not correct. It is necessary to make an enquiry for ascertaining the correct payable amount. No valid notice to quit was given under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. In any case, on the grounds stated in the plaint the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree for ejectment. The plaintiff is not entitled to any mesen profits, because it is a lawful tenant. In any case, the claimed rate of mesne profits is an inflated one.