BANK OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. MAHESH CHANDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendant's appeal and has been directed against that judgment and decree dated 3.12.1998, passed by the Additional District Judge, Ambala, who affirmed the judgment and decree dated 31.5.1997 passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Ambala Cantt. who decreed the suit of the plaintiffs for possession against the present appellant.

(2.) SOME facts can be noticed in the following manners. The case set up by the plaintiffs before the trial Court was that they are the owners of the building bearing House tax No. 6269, 6269/2 situated at Sanjay Gandhi Marg, Ambala Cantt. The defendants were in need of the premises for their Branch office at Ambala Cantt. They requested the plaintiffs to give them premises on lease on the ground floor of the three storyed building to be constructed by them after demolishing the aforesaid old building for a period of five years with option to renew the lease for further period of four years at the rate of Rs. 2.50 per square feet of the carpet area. The plaintiffs requested the defendants to grant finance for construction of building. Defendants agreed to do so. An agreement to that effect dated 9th April, 1981 was reduced into writing. Plaintiffs agreed to give the possession of the said premises to the defendants within six months or by 15th August, 1981 whichever was earlier.

(3.) THE plaintiffs raised the construction in the shape of three storyed building and let out the premises on the ground floor to the defendants as per agreement. Plaintiffs could not hand over the possession by 15th August, 1981 as agreed. Defendants wrote a letter to the plaintiffs dated 16.11.1981 to expedite the delivery of the possession. The plaintiffs assured to the defendants that the possession of the ground floor will be delivered by 10.1.1982. Ultimately, the possession was handed over to the defendants on 5.2.82. According to the plaintiffs, the possession could not be delivered in time because the construction could not be completed by the agreed time. After the expirty of five years period, the defendants wanted to extend the lease agreement for a period of four years w.e.f. 1.7.1989 at the rate of Rs. 2.87 per square feet carpet area to which the plaintiffs did not agree. Plaintiffs terminated the tenancy by serving the defendants with a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Hence this suit was instituted on 3.11.1991.