TOYO ENGINEERING (INDIA) LTD Vs. UCO BANK
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
TOYO ENGINEERING (INDIA) LTD
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This petition is directed against the judgment dated 30.11.2006 passed
by the learned Additional District Judge, New Delhi in an appeal under Section 9
of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971
(hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). The said appeal was preferred
against the order dated 08.04.2005 passed by the Estate Officer.
(2.) The premises in question is situated on the First Floor of the UCO Bank
Building at 5, Parliament Street, New Delhi. The said premises has an area of
2405 sq. ft. The same was leased out to M/s Mitsui and Company by a lease deed
dated 15.10.1970 by UCO Bank for a period of five years w.e.f. 01.10.1968 to
01.10.1973. The lease permitted induction of a sub-tenant and the petitioner
[M/s Toyo Engineering (India) Ltd] was inducted as a sub-tenant by M/s Mitsui
and Company. The leased expired on 01.10.1973. No further lease was executed
by UCO Bank. However, it continued to accept rents. By a letter dated
17.12.1975, M/s Mitsui and Company conveyed to UCO Bank that it had authorised
the petitioner to pay rent for the said premises on its behalf. A notice of
termination of tenancy under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882
was issued by UCO Bank on 15.10.1991 and served upon M/s Mitsui and Company as
well as on the petitioner. The petitioner replied to the said notice on
09.12.1991 admitting that it was a sub-tenant of M/s Mitsui and Company.
Thereafter, proceedings under the said Act were initiated against M/s Mitsui and
Company. The Estate Officer passed an order on 20.09.2001 directing the
eviction of M/s Mitsui and Company.
(3.) It so happened that both M/s Mitsui and Company as well as the
petitioner preferred separate appeals against the said order dated 20.09.2001
passed by the Estate Officer. These appeals were disposed of by the learned
Additional District Judge by a common order dated 15.03.2003. The appeal filed
by M/s Mitsui and Company was dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the
petitioner was allowed on the ground that no notice under Section 4 of the said
Act had been served upon the petitioner.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.