- (1.) The present appeal has been filed by defendant no. 1, who is aggrieved against the concurrent findings of the Courts below whereby suit for declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to continue in possession as lessee of Industrial Plot bearing No. E-25, Focal Point, Hoshiarpur shown red and marked A B C D in the site plan attached was decreed and the letter dated 10.6.2002 issued by defendant no. 1-appellant canceling the lease was held as ineffective and the said defendant was restrained from taking any recovery of past arrears of any kind against the plot in dispute. The facts necessary for decision of the present appeal are as under:- That the plot in dispute was owned by the appellant-defendant no. 1-Corporation, who vide a lease agreement dated 30.6.1978 leased out the said plot for a period of 99 years to one M/s Ashoka Spinning Industries and the lease was with effect from 5.12.1970 and was for a period of 99 years. M/s Ashoka Spinning Industries had taken an industrial loan from defendant no. 2-Punjab Financial Corporation and mortgaged the lease right of plot in dispute along with building and machinery built thereon with said defendant no. 2 and the charge was created with the permission of defendant no. 1. The loanee industry failed to return the loan and an application was filed by defendant no. 2 before the Court of Addl. District Judge, Hoshiarpur for recovering the loan from M/s Ashoka Spinning Industries and a decree for recovery was obtained and plot in dispute and the super structure and machinery standing thereon was accordingly put to auction by the then Addl. District Judge, Hoshiarpur. Defendant No. 2-Punjab Financial Corporation after obtaining permission purchased the plot in dispute vide sale certificate dated 29.3.1988 and was declared owner of the lessee rights of the plot in dispute and the super structure standing thereon. Thereafter, defendant no. 2 issued public notice to sell the plot in dispute and in the notice the intended purchaser was not to be fastened with any past liability of payment of dues with regard to the plot in dispute. Keeping in view the said conditions, the plaintiff agreed to purchase the plot in dispute along with machinery etc. for a total consideration of Rs. 3 lacs vide agreement to sell dated 15.12.1989. As per agreement itself the purchaser/plaintiff was liable to pay the land revenue or other taxes in respect of the property which would fall due after the date of the agreement to sell and the sale deed of the plot was not executed for want of no objection certificate from defendant No. 1. In 1994, defendant no. 1 tried to evict the plaintiff from the suit property on which the plaintiff filed a suit for injunction against the defendants, which was decreed by the Court vide judgment dated 6.11.1988 and the same was upheld on 3.8.2000 by the Appellate Court. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 issued letter dated 22.12.2000 and asked the plaintiff to pay amount of Rs. 8,55,855/-on account of some previous dues which were recoverable from M/s Ashoka Spinning Industries. The plaintiff had replied to the said notice and explained the position. Thereafter, the impugned letter dated 10.6.2002 was issued canceling the allotment/lessee rights of the plot. Accordingly, the said letter was challenged pleading that defendant no. 1 has no right to recover any dues from the plaintiff nor has any right to start any proceedings for taking possession from the plaintiff. The plaintiff had spent huge amount by raising factory over the site in dispute and the defendant no. 1 was now estopped from taking any action against the plaintiff and the plaintiff purchased the title from defendant no. 2, who had purchased vide court auction and the title of the plaintiff was without any past encumbrance of any nature.
(2.) Defendants No. 1 and 2 filed separate written statements and while contesting the suit took various objections including the maintainability of the suit, locus standi and on the ground of estoppel. It was pleaded that the allotment of the plot was on 5.12.1977 and not on 5.12.1970 and that the lessee was allowed to mortgage the lease rights in respect of the plot in dispute to obtain an industrial loan from the Punjab Financial Corporation-defendant no. 2. The plaintiff and defendant no. 2 had not disclosed the fact regarding the sale of the plot by the Punjab Financial Corporation and the sale certificate issued by the Court of Addl. District Judge was not produced before the Defendant No. 1-Corporation and the Corporation was never informed by defendant no. 2. It was alleged that there was a memorandum of understanding between defendant no. 1 and 2 to settle inter corporate claims and as per the said memorandum the substituted allottee was liable to deposit all the dues towards the plot. Accordingly, it was pleaded that a sum of Rs. 10,02,978/0 and other applicable charges were due against the plot as on 31.3.2003 and no dues certificate could be issued and plaintiff was a substituted allottee and the defendants were entitled to charge the principal amount along with normal interest as per the memorandum of understanding and the allottee had been in default and accordingly, the same was being claimed. Hence, plaintiff was liable to pay the outstanding dues and thereafter answering defendant could consider to transfer the lease rights of the plaintiff in favour of the plaintiff.
(3.) Defendant no. 2 in his written statement averred that the answering defendant had purchased the lease hold rights in the building and machinery etc. in public auction and a sale certificate was duly issued on 29.3.1988 in favour of the answering defendant by the Court of Addl. District Judge, Hoshiarpur and plaintiff had entered into sale agreement on 15.12.1989 with the answering defendant no. 2 and he failed to comply with the terms of the agreement to sell, therefore, the sale deed was not executed in his favour.;