BANK OF INDIA Vs. GOVIND DEVI BINANI
LAWS(CAL)-1983-8-30
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on August 24,1983

BANK OF INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
GOVIND DEVI BINANI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS appeal at the instance of the Bank of India arose out of a suit of eviction filed by the landlord against the bank. It appears that the plaintiffs are trustees of the Trust, stvled as "nathi Bai binani Trust" and the premises No. 59, cotton Street, Calcutta belongs to the said trust. By a registered deed of lease dated 1st November, 1958, the aforesaid Trust, through its trustees, granted lease to the defendant in respect of the entire first floor of the premises No. 59, Cotton Street, calcutta, including a separate staircase and one kitchen room on the ground floor of the said premises for a period of 16 years commencing from the first day of September 1958, and, terminating on 31st day of august, 1974, with an option to the lessee to extend the same thereafter for a period of 3 years at a monthly rent of Rs. 1200/-since mutually increased to Rs. 1320/for the facility of installing air-conditioned unit payable according to English Calendar month. One of the said terms of the lease was that: "3 (b ). That the defendant shall at the expiration or sooner determination of the terms hereby granted peacefully and quietly yield and deliver up to the plaintiffs vacant possession of the demised premises and the said kitchen room in the ground floor in as good condition as the same now are with structural additions and constructions as aforesaid in reasonable wear and tear and damage by fire or other act of God or by any kind of irresistible force always excepted".
(2.) IN pursuance of the terms of the lease, the defendant was continuing in possession of the premises and the plaintiffs were accepting rent from the defendant. After the expiry of the original period of the said lease on 31st August, 1974, the defendant exercised the option contained in the lease which was after some demur accepted to by the plaintiffs and the defendant continued in possession of the premises in the same terms and conditions till the 31st august, 1977, when the said extended period expired. It appears that the defendant, Bank of India, did not vacate the premises after the expiry of 31st August, 1977 whereupon the plaintiffs by letter dated 8th august, 1977 asked the defendant. Bank of India to vacate the premises by 31st august, 1977. The defendant Bank having refused to do so, the instant suit was filed. The defendant Bank entered appearance and filed written statement, inter alia, alleging that the defendant was originally inducted to the tenancy in suit on 1. 9. 58, by the plaintiff No. 1 and thereafter a registered deed was executed on 1. 11. 58, between Nathi Bai Binani Trust Estate as lessors and the defendant as Lessee, it is admitted that in the lease there was a covenant for option of renewal of the lease by this defendant for further period of 3 years on fulfilment of certain terms by the Bank. On the expiry of the Lease period of 16 years, there was no renewal of the lease nor any lease deed for any further period was executed and it is alleged that the defendant became monthly tenant under the plaintiff No. 1 and the said Bhowanidas Binani as trustees of the said Trust Estate on and from 1. 9. 74, and the tenancy was governed by the West (Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.
(3.) BEFORE we deal with the question raised in this appeal, it is convenient for us to refer to some of the documents which are exhibited in the suit. Exhibit "1" is a Deed of Lease registered on 1st November, 1958, in favour of the Bank of India for 16 years. It appears that during the subsistence of the lease, the Bank of India wanted to install air-condition machine in be premises and by agreement by both the parties for the added advantage, the rent was enhanced from Rs. 1200/- to 1320/ -. Be that as it may, under the stipulation of the renewal clause, it was provided that the option for renewal must be exercised, one year before the expiry of the term of the lease.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.