BHAGIRATHMALL KANODIA Vs. RAMRICKLAL GIRDHARDAS
LAWS(CAL)-1976-12-10
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on December 23,1976

BHAGIRATHMALL KANODIA Appellant
VERSUS
RAMRICKLAL GIRDHARDAS Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SAROJENDRA KUMAR DUTT V. PURNACHANDRA SINHA [REFERRED TO]
LAKSHAN CHUNDER DEY VS. SMNIKUNJAMONI DASSI [REFERRED TO]
MAHARAJ BAHADUR SINGH VS. SURENDRA NARAIN SINGH , CHATRAPAT SINGH AND MRAHFORBES [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

PRAGATISHEEL SAHKARI GRIH NIRMAN SAMITI LIMITED VS. RAJESHWARI DEVI [LAWS(ALL)-1989-10-42] [REFERRED TO]
ASHYANA CONSTRUCTION VS. OMAR [LAWS(CAL)-2012-9-84] [REFERRED TO]
DURGA DAS VS. SOLACE AND ASSOCIATES [LAWS(CAL)-2012-4-43] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

A.N.Sen, J. - (1.)This appeal arises out of the judgment and order passed by Ramendra Mohan Dutta. J. on the 20th of March 1975. The facts material for the purpose of this appeal may be briefly indicated.
(2.)A suit was filed by the appellants as plaintiffs who happened to be the Trustees of a Trust known as Rai Bahadur Bissessurlal Motilal Halwasiya Trust for recovery of possession of premises No. 150B, Lower Chitpur Road, Calcutta. The defendants to the said suit were (1) Ramricklal Girdhardas, (2) Narsinghdas Haldia and (3) Naaz Cinema. The defendants were carrying on business in the said premises under the name and style of Naaz Cinema. The defendants also filed a suit against the Trustees and in the said suit the defendants had asked for a declaration that the defendants continued to be the tenants under the plaintiffs in respect of the said premises. Both the said suits were settled and terms of settlement were filed. It is necessary to set out the terms of settlement which were filed in the suit. The said settlement between the parties to the suit reads as follows:--
"It is declared that the defendant No. 2 was never the tenant on the premises in suit and a decree is made accordingly. The plaintiffs and the defendants Nos. 1 and 3 have settled the disputes in the suit on the following terms and conditions: Terms of Settlement That from 1st July, 1968 the tenancy in respect of the suit premises will be in favour of Mrs. Laxmi V. Mansata, Hirendra V. Mansata. Suryakanta V. Mansata, Jitendra V. Mansata of No. 87-K, Park Street, Calcutta-16. But for the purpose of serving notice of any sort in respect of tenancy the same shall be deemed to have been served on all it served on any one of them. 2. That the tenancy shall be according to English Calendar month starting from the 1st day of the month and ending with the last day of the same month. 3.That on and from 1st July, 1968 the rent of the suit premises will be Rs. 2,000 (Rupees two thousand) only per month which shall be payable to the plaintiffs landlords of their succeeding month for which the rent shall be due. 4. That the rent of Rs. 2,000 per month, as aforesaid, is inclusive of occupiers' share of the Corporation taxes. 5. That the tenant shall pay from 1st July, 1968 a sum of Rs. 600 (Rupees six hundred) per month by way of hire charged for furnitures along with the rent as aforesaid and will continue to pay the same so long they do not surrender the tenancy or give vacant possession of the premises to the landlords. 6. That the tenants will use the Cinema House being the premises in suit for exhibition of Films and theatrical performance with liberty to make provisions for Canteen and Restaurants outside the auditorium for the facility of its audience only. 7. That the tenants paying rent regularly as per Clause 3 and hire charges as per clause No. 5 and using the premises as per Clause 6 will not be liable to be evicted by the plaintiff/landlords on any grounds whatsoever including the grounds of own use and occupation and/or buildings or re-buildings except as provided hereinafter. 8. That the tenants shall have the option to surrender the tenancy to the plaintiff/landlords or their successors in office by giving six calendar months' notice in writing in advance to them. 9. That the tenants shall carry out all the requisitions and requirements imposed by any competent authority for carrying on the said Cinema business at the suit premises and in no way the plaintiffs/ landlords shall toe liable for the breach of same by the tenants. 10. The tenants shall be entitled to make at their own costs any additions and alterations to their demised premises or any part thereof including constructional and structural changes and erect any kind of permanent structures and also to install air conditioning plants, machines and apparatus, as would be required from time to time only for the improvement of the Cinema business with prior approval in writing of the landlords and such approval shall not be withheld provided that any such additions and/or alterations will not diminish the total value of the premises in suit. The landlords will sign any plans or drawings which the tenants may submit from time to time for procuring the sanction of the Calcutta Corporation or other local or statutory bodies in connection with such additions, alterations and improvements. But, under no circumstances, the tenants are allowed to make unauthorised constructions, additions or alterations from now onwards which in any way contravenes any law for the time being in force. All repairs, if any, required to the demised premises, the same will be done by the tenants at their own costs. All additions and alterations of a fixed nature will belong to the landlords. The tenants shall have no right to demolish the demised premises in its entirety. 11. The tenants will have the right to sublet the premises partly or wholly to its allied concerns limited to the purpose hereinbefore mentioned but subletting must have the prior approval of the landlords in writing and such permission shall not be unduly withheld. Provided that notwithstanding such subletting the tenants will be responsible for the regular payment of rent and for due performance of the other terms and conditions of the tenancy. Such subtenants shall be bound to observe all the terms and conditions mentioned herein and any breach of any of the terms by the sub-tenants shall be deemed to be the breach by the tenants. 12. That the plaintiffs/landlords shall be entitled to issue 4 (four) passes for free entry in any available class in any or every show at the cinema house except Friday. Saturday and Sunday and public holidays and in the first week of the picture. The entertainment tax, if any, will be payable by the pass-holders. 13. Notwithstanding anything contained hereinabove, if the tenants fail to pay the rent and hire charges in time in respect of the suit premises for any two months or make any breach of any of the terms the landlords shall have the right to take action for ejectment of the tenants. 14. Suit No. 1394 of 1961 filed by the defendant No, 1 in his Court against the plaintiffs in the suit and others in the High Court at Calcutta (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction) is unconditionally withdrawn against all the parties and there will be no order of costs in that suit. 15. Each party will bear and pay its respective costs in the suit. Dated this 6th day of August, 1968. For self and Naaz Cinema Sd/ Bhagirathmuti Kanodia Ramricklal Girdhardas Ram Prasad Goenka Bhagwati Prasad Khaitan C. S. Roy Chowdhury & Co. Madhav Prasad Birla Jagannath Beriwala Attorney for the defendant Nos. 1 and 3. Purushottam Das Halwaisya Signature in Vernacular by the pen of Ganeshmal Baid (Laxmi V. Mansata) (in Vernacular) Constituted Attorney. Narendra V. Mansata Sham Sundar Halwasiya. Surya Kant V. Mansata L. P. Agarwalla & Co. Solicitors. Jitendra V. Mansata for the plaintiffs."
The said settlement was signed on behalf of the plaintiffs, on behalf of the defendants and also on behalf of the Mansata in whose favour a tenancy on the terms and conditions mentioned in the settlement was agreed to be created.
(3.)Though the said settlement was put in on the 7th of August 1968, it appears that the decree on the basis of the said settlement was not drawn up for a number of years thereafter. It further appears that the department had pointed out to the Court that the department felt some difficulty in drawing up the said decree on the basis of the said settlement,
;


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