M.M.Dutt, J. - (1.) The appellants M/s. United Investment Corporation a partnership firm and its partner Smt. Bandana Suraiya have, in this appeal, challenged the propriety of the order of D.K. Sen, J., whereby the learned Judge discharged the Rule Nisi issued on the application of the appellants under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) By an indenture of lease dt. July 56, 1962 Mehta Suraiya (P) Ltd., granted a lease of a piece of land measuring 10 cottahs 2 chittacks 28 sq. ft. comprised in premises No. 14/1B, Ezra Street, Calcutta to the appellant firm for a period of 33 years. It is provided in the lease that the rent for the first three years would be Rs. 100/- per month and thereafter, for the remaining thirty years the rent would be at the rate of Rs. 2.500/- per month. Under the lease, the lessee was to use the demised premises for the construction of a building thereon for office and/or residential purposes according to the map or plan duly signed by the parties and for letting out the same. It was enjoined that the lessee was to erect and complete the building within a period of three years from the data of the lease, Clause (n) of para 1 of the lease provides that the lessee shall deliver up his full possession of the demised premises and the messuages and buildings to be erected thereon at the expiration or sooner determination of the lease, Clause (d) of para 3 of the lease is a renewal clause under which the lessee would be entitled to have the lease renewed for a further term of 33 years and on the expiry of the said term for another term of 33 years by serving before the expiry of each term three months' notice on the lessor. The rate of rent, however, would remain the same, namely, Rs. 2,500/- per month, Clause (e) of para 1 of the lease provides as follows : "To bear pay and discharge all such Government and Municipal rates and taxes and/or assessments which are now imposed or charged or may hereafter be imposed or charged by the Municipality or competent authority on the demised premises and the messuages and buildings to be erected thereon whether payable by the owner or occupier and also to bear and pay all other outgoings and demands whatsoever now imposed or charged or hereafter to be imposed or charged for or in respect of the demised premises and the messuages and buildings to be erected thereon as aforesaid ........"
(3.) It thus appears that the lessee was to pay both shares of the municipal taxes in respect of the building that would be constructed by it upon the demised land. Indeed the lessee, that is, the appellant firm has since constructed a building and let out the same. The appellant firm has been realising rents from the sub-tenants.;