JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) These two appeals, though coming from separate judgments and
orders passed by the Bombay High Court, arise from the same suit for
eviction instituted by the landlord which figures in both the appeals as
respondent no.1. The appellant in the appeal arising from SLP (C) No.19522
of 2008 is the Board of Trustees of the Port of Mumbai (hereinafter
"Mumbai Port Trust"). It was the sole defendant, described as the tenant, in
the suit for eviction as it was originally filed. Later on, by an amendment
M/s Wadi Bunder Cotton Press Company (hereinafter "WBC Company"),
the appellant in the appeal arising from SLP (C) No.36246 of 2010, was
joined in as defendant no.2 as the sub-tenant under the defendant, the Board
of Trustees of the Port of Mumbai. From that stage, Mumbai Port Trust, the
principal tenant and WBC Company, the sub-tenant came to be arrayed in
the suit as defendants 1 & 2 respectively.
(3.) The plaintiff respondent no.1 filed a suit in the court of Small Causes
at Bombay registered as RAE suit no.83/197 of 1993, seeking inter alia a
decree of eviction, against the defendants from the suit land admeasuring
about 3273.394 square yards, situated at Santacruz Estate, Mazgaon,
Bombay. According to the plaintiff-respondent no.1, the suit land was given
to defendant no.1 on lease for 999 (nine hundred and ninety nine) years by
the plaintiff's predecessors-in-interest under a registered lease deed dated
May 10, 18861. In terms of the lease deed, defendant no.1, the lessee had the
right to renewal but it had no right to assign the leased out land to any third
party. As a matter of fact, there was an express prohibition against
assignment in clause 4 of the lease deed which is as under:
"4. That they the said Trustees their successors or
assigns will not (subject never the less as
hereinafter mentioned) assign the said premises or
any part thereof without the licence in writing of
the lessors their heirs executors administrators
assigns first obtained."
[The only exception to the above prohibition was the right given to the
lessee to part with and dedicate some portions, up to a specified limit, from
the aggregate of the lands covered by the lease for public roads and ways
with the consent of the lessors. But in that case the lessors agreed to give
such consent upon the reasonable applications of the lessee from time to
time and within the limit (prescribed under the lease).];
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.