Jainendra Kumar Ranka, J. - (1.) INSTANT writ petition is directed against the order dt. 02.01.2012 and 10.01.2012 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 6, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Civil Misc. Case No. 15/2008, titled as M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited vs. Premchand Jain & Ors. whereby the Court settled terms and conditions of the lease deed and passed certain directions with respect to the accumulated arrears. The undisputed facts, emerging from the facts available on record, disclose that the respondents No. 1 to 4 are owners of a piece of land bearing No. A -27/12, Sawai Jai Singh Highway, Bani Park, Jaipur admeasuring about 992.20 sq. meters. The petitioner -Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (for short, 'the petitioner -company') principally engaged in the petroleum business, issued an advertisement on 02.11.2002 for establishing of a retail outlet under the Land Linkage Category upon which the respondents No. 1 to 4 made an offer by an application dt. 31.12.2003, negotiations were held and minutes of meeting were drawn on 04.02.2003 and 26.07.2004. The petitioner -company claims that a draft of lease deed was also signed by the respondents on 15.12.2005 who further signed and executed an undertaking -cum -indemnity bond dt. 31.07.2004. The respondents No. 1 to 4 claim that the draft was prepared on signed papers of the respondents and was not acted upon whereas the undertaking -cum -indemnity bond was signed with the clear understanding that the dealership under the Land Linkage Category would be valid as long as the lease is operative. The rate of rent (w.e.f. 11.02.2003) which was Rs. 90,000/ - per month with an enhancement of 20% after every five years and the lease term of 20 years is not a matter of dispute between the parties. A petrol pump has already been established by the petitioner -company upon the land of the respondents No. 1 to 4 and a dealership under Land Linkage category has also been awarded to the respondents who are operating under the name and style of Balaji Petroleum, Bani Park, Jaipur.
(2.) AS a formal lease deed was not executed and registered between the parties, the petitioner -company filed a suit for specific performance and permanent injunction alongwith an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of C.P.C. against the respondents No. 1 to 4. The application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 was decided and certain directions came to be passed. An application under Sec. 151 C.P.C. was also filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4 for compliance of the temporary injunction order which was adjudicated vide order dt. 17.12.2008. This order was challenged by the petitioner -company by way of filing a writ petition before this Court bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1680/2009 and the same was disposed of by this Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahesh Bhagwati) on 01.12.2011. The relevant portion of the said order passed by this Court (supra) is reproduced here as under: - Having considered the submissions made at the bar, it is revealed that both the parties are prepared to execute lease -deed in accordance with the terms and conditions as agreed upon between them but none of them is found coming forward with clean mind. Petitioner wants certain terms and conditions to be incorporated as per his convenience and in contra. The respondents -defendants intend to incorporate those terms and conditions, which suits them, but the directions issued by the learned trial Court while adjudicating the application filed under order 39 Rule 1 and 1 of C.P.C. tangibly suggests that both the parties are required to execute lease -deed as per the terms and conditions agreed upon between the parties and incorporate those conditions and issues too, which were recorded in minutes pursuant to the conference having taken place between the parties on 04.02.2003 and 26.07.2004. To resolve the controversy, I feel to direct both the parties to submit proposed lease -deed within a period of 15 days in accordance with the terms and conditions as agreed upon between the parties and submit before the learned trial Court and the learned trial Court is directed to settle a final lease -deed within a period of fifteen days, after having scanned both the lease -deeds; so as to give effect to the afore -stated terms and conditions in letter and spirit. The learned trial Court is also expected to pass an order with regard to payment of arrears of rent, which have been pending unpaid for the last seven years, again in accordance with the terms and conditions, as agreed upon between the parties. With the afore -stated directions, the writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly. Consequent upon the disposal of the writ petition, the stay application does not survive and the same also stands disposed of accordingly. Upon such directions, on 14.12.2011, the respondents No. 1 to 4 submitted a draft lease deed and the petitioner -company also submitted a draft lease deed on 16.12.2011 before the trial Court. The petitioner -company also submitted objection on the draft lease deed submitted by the respondents No. 1 to 4.
(3.) THE trial Court, in the light of the order of this Court dt. 01.12.2011, after hearing the rival parties and upon perusal of the record, passed an order dt. 02.01.2012 settling terms and conditions of the lease deed and passed certain directions with respect to the accumulated arrears. Certain typographical errors crept in this order which was corrected by the trial Court vide order dt. 10.01.2012. It is these orders which are under challenge by the petitioner -company in the instant writ petition.;