DELTA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs. SHYAM SUNDAR GANERIWALLA
LAWS(SC)-1999-4-1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: CALCUTTA)
Decided on April 09,1999

DELTA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
SHYAM SUNDAR GANERIWALLA Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

FRANCIS VS. SARADA [LAWS(KER)-2004-2-23] [REFERRED TO]
JAYARAM VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(KAR)-2000-11-103] [REFERRED TO]
GEORGE CHANDI, S/O GEORGE, PALUNDA, CHUNGATHARA AMSOM DESOM AND OTHERS VS. BEENA AND OTHERS [LAWS(KER)-2018-7-979] [REFERRED TO]
GEORGE CHANDI VS. BEENA [LAWS(KER)-2018-7-244] [REFERRED TO]
ROOP KUMAR VS. MOHAN THEDANI [LAWS(SC)-2003-4-33] [REFERRED TO]
ADMINISTRATOR OF SPECIFIED UNDERTAKING OF THE U T I VS. GARWARE POLYESTER LTD [LAWS(SC)-2005-5-26] [REFERRED TO]
RAMDEV FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD VS. ARVINDBHAI RAMBHAI PATEL [LAWS(SC)-2006-8-82] [REFERRED TO]
OIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSION VS. SAW PIPES LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-2003-4-89] [REFERRED . " (PARA 37) RE:]
G S LAMBA AND SONS VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2011-1-24] [REFERRED TO]
K R KRISHNA MURTHY VS. HYDRABAD ALLWYN LTD [LAWS(APH)-2005-11-79] [REFERRED TO]
PRADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES PRADEEP PORT TRUST [LAWS(ORI)-2008-12-3] [REFERRED TO]
SPIC SMO VS. TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(MAD)-2012-8-396] [REFERRED TO]
BISWAJIT SAMANTA VS. DHAKURIA SERVICE CENTRE AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2015-11-30] [REFERRED TO]
LEGJIN TSHERING VS. RINCHEN CHAPKHANWALLA [LAWS(CAL)-2013-9-132] [REFERRED TO]
AIR CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. REENA DAS [LAWS(CAL)-2014-8-23] [REFERRED TO]
EQUESTRAIN CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE, BANGALORE VS. CHAMUNDI HOTEL PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE. [LAWS(KAR)-2017-8-29] [REFERRED TO]
SRI ARUN KUMAR PATTANAYAK VS. SRI PARTHA PRATIM DAS [LAWS(CAL)-2022-3-2] [REFERRED TO]
VASANTH COLOUR LABORATORIES PVT. LTD. VS. DIVYA DEVI [LAWS(KAR)-2016-1-205] [REFERRED TO]
JOAO NECESSIDADE ROOQUE ANTONIO VS. VAMAN GOVIND LOTLIKAR [LAWS(BOM)-2012-12-124] [REFERRED TO]
SAI INVESTMENTS VS. BHARTI SHIPYARD LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-2016-3-129] [REFERRED TO]
SULPHUR MILLS LIMITED VS. DAYAL FERTILIZERS PVT LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-2020-11-170] [REFERRED TO]
RAMCHANDRA VISHNU PARANJAPE DR VS. SHARAYU JUGALKISHORE GUPTA [LAWS(BOM)-2003-6-24] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH GANESH LOTLIKAR VS. JOEL AVELINO NORONHA [LAWS(BOM)-2014-2-363] [REFERRED]
NORA FURTADO, LAURA FURTADO VS. KENNETH PEREIRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-12-239] [REFERRED TO]
AMRITLAL VALJI VS. G S SHAH [LAWS(BOM)-2006-6-121] [REFERRED TO]
MARIA MANUELA PIEDADEBERNADETE TEREZA QUITERIA MONIZ VS. VASSANT SHET SHIRODKAR [LAWS(BOM)-2006-6-94] [REFERRED TO]
PETER ALEX D SOUZA VS. PRITHI PAUL SINGH [LAWS(BOM)-2002-4-92] [REFERRED TO]
UMMUL QURA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2001-9-70] [REFERRED TO]
SHARDAPRASAD JAIJAI RAM PANDEY VS. SAKUVAN JAMALUDDIN GHORI AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-8-107] [REFERRED TO]
C R RAMAMURTHY IYER VS. IDOL OF ARULMIGHU JAMBUKESWARAR AKILANDESWARI TEMPLE [LAWS(MAD)-2000-1-98] [REFERRED TO]
BENTO DE SOUZA EGYPSY VS. YVETTER ALVARES COLACO ALIAS MARAI EMILIA YVETTE GADINHO ALVARES COLACO [LAWS(BOM)-2006-2-7] [REFERRED TO]
NRP PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-2020-1-224] [REFERRED TO]
TRUSTEES OF THE VICTORIA MEMORIAL HALL VS. SATYA CHAKRABORTY [LAWS(CAL)-2000-9-8] [REFERRED TO]
GODVIN CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2014-4-226] [REFERRED TO]
SMAGH BHULLAR VS. PUNJAB STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-138] [REFERRED TO]
SELEX SISTEMI INTEGRATI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2011-9-162] [REFERRED TO]
VIDYA SECURITIES LIMITED VS. COMFORT LIVING HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(DLH)-2002-11-136] [REFERRED TO]
GULREZ QURASHI VS. CUSTODIAN GENERAL [LAWS(J&K)-2003-7-7] [REFERRED TO]
DEVENDER BHATI VS. CHANDER KANTA [LAWS(DLH)-2015-12-211] [REFERRED TO]
MADHU BEHAL VS. RISHI KUMA [LAWS(P&H)-2009-1-127] [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATED THEATRES VS. VIJAY KUMAR [LAWS(P&H)-2005-5-26] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH KUMAR GUPTA VS. SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA [LAWS(DLH)-2015-7-374] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT UTPADAN NIGAM LTD. VS. PARSA KENTE COLLIERIES LTD. [LAWS(RAJ)-2018-2-266] [REFERRED TO]
PATAL CHANDRA CHAKRABORTY VS. PULIN BEHARI CHAKRABORTY [LAWS(CAL)-2003-12-30] [REFERRED TO]
AYAN CHATTERJEE VS. FUTURE TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION [LAWS(CAL)-2005-7-61] [REFERRED TO]
OLD WORLD HOSPITALITY LTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2011-5-17] [REFERRED TO]
VODAFONE ESSAR MOBILE SERVICES LTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2011-7-115] [REFERRED TO]
M/S PANTALOON RETAIL (INDIA) LTD VS. CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY/BOARD OF REVENUE [LAWS(ALL)-2012-9-38] [REFERRED TO]
PUSHPA SHARMA VS. V.V.GUJRAL [LAWS(DLH)-2014-1-177] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL MALHAN VS. PEAREY LAL BHAWAN ASSOCIATION [LAWS(DLH)-2003-7-145] [REFERRED TO]
DALIP SINGH VS. RAM CHANDER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-2-135] [REFERRED TO]
DR. VIKRAMJIT SINGH ROHATGI AND ANR. VS. SMT. PROVABATI DAS AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2008-4-111] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY BANSAL VS. M/S KAITHAL PROVISION STORE AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2018-4-88] [REFERRED TO]
ROOP KUMAR VS. MOHAN THEDANI [LAWS(DLH)-2001-1-4] [REFERRED]
SAILENDRA NATH PAL VS. AGRI HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2011-8-24] [REFERRED TO]
BRAHMANAND KEJRIWAL VS. KUSHAL KISHORE AGGARWAL [LAWS(DLH)-2001-1-125] [REFERRED]
HANSALAYA PROPERTIES AND ANR. VS. DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2008-8-328] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN BANK MUTUAL FUND VS. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2006-7-227] [REFERRED]
SHRIKANT DATTATRAYA DESHPANDE VS. SHALINI WAMAN BHAT [LAWS(BOM)-2019-9-42] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. N.I.I.T. LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2009-9-264] [REFERRED TO]
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA VS. INDIAN BANK MUTUAL FUND [LAWS(DLH)-2008-10-105] [REFERRED TO]
SHISHIR BAJAJ VS. INDIA YOUTH CENTRES TRUST [LAWS(DLH)-2010-7-411] [REFERRED TO]
S.N.F. ALLOYS PVT. LTD VS. NATIONAL SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2009-8-272] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL MANILAL SANGHVI VS. DEVIKA DHANANJAY GOKHALE [LAWS(BOM)-2018-4-149] [REFERRED TO]
ASEAN LNG TRADING CO LTD NOW KNOWN AS PETRONAS LNG LTD VS. ADANI ENERGY LTD [LAWS(GJH)-2018-7-3] [REFERRED TO]
SALONI SUBHASHCHANDRA NAGZARKAR, W/O LATE SUBHASHCHANDRA NAGZARKAR VS. SUYOG SAMUEL ARAWATTIGI [LAWS(BOM)-2018-7-142] [REFERRED TO]
ANA FRANCISCA BRAGANZA VS. JAWAHARLAL EDWIN DO CARMO MONIZ [LAWS(BOM)-2021-2-98] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Shah, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) These appeals are filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 2nd December, 1997 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta in Appeal from Original Decree Nos. 148 of 1992 and 165 of 1992 (reported in AIR 1998 Cal 233). Undisputed facts of the matter are that original owner of the premises was Abhiram Mullick (since deceased) who created tenancy of the premises, namely, No. 4D, Council House Street, Calcutta in favour of Mallika Investment Company Private Limited. Dewar's Garage India Private Limited was inducted into the premises as the monthly tenant under Mallika Investment Company Private Limited. Dewar's Garage (India) Private Ltd. (in short 'Dewar') was maintaining and running a petrol service station for sale of motor spares and components at the tenanted premises. Dewar had erected and built certain structures on the said premises. Dewar was subsequently amalgamated into Delta International Limited (appellant-plaintiff). By an agreement dated 18th July, 1970, Dewar executed leave and license agreement in favour of ESSO Standard Eastern Inc. (in short ESSO). The ESSO in turn permitted Shyam Sunder Ganeriwalla, respondent No. 1, to run a petrol service station. By an Order passed in Company Petition No. 331/91, Dewar was amalgamated with plaintiff (Delta International Limited). Further, the business undertakings and the estates of ESSO also had been taken over by the Act of Parliament and has been transferred and assigned by the Central Government in favour of M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. In 1985, Delta International Limited filed Civil Suit No. 491/85 in the High Court of Calcutta for a perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants and/or their servants, agents and assigns from using any of the fixtures, fittings and accessories lying at suit premises; for damages, for wrongful use and occupation of the premises at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- p.m. from 1st May, 1985, that is, the date of termination of leave and license as claimed in the plaint and for decree for possession of the said premises and other reliefs. The learned single Judge passed the decree in favour of the plaintiff by holding that the agreement in question was only a license agreement and it was not a sub-lease. In appeal, the said Judgment was reversed by holding that the agreement in question constitutes a lease mainly on the basis of exclusive possession and the Division Bench observed that "to put is pithily, if an interest in immovable property entitling the transferees to enjoyment is created, it is a lease, if permission to use land without right to exclusive possession is alone granted, a licence is the legal result."
(3.) At the time of hearing of this appeal, learned Counsel for the parties exhaustively referred to the material terms and conditions of the agreement in which the term 'leave and license' is used. In support of their contentions, they also referred to various decisions which have laid down tests to find out in which set of circumstances even though the document is termed as a leave and license could be construed as a lease.;


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