Writ maintainability in lease renewal disputes affirmed where statutory power is challenged and no complex fact inquiry is needed.

A writ petition challenging a renewal notice arising from a lease and statutory arrangement was held maintainable because the dispute involved exercise of statutory power and did not require complicated factual investigation; delay was not treated as a bar on the facts. The lessee was not entitled to claim renewal beyond the fixed extended period, as the lease deed and governing statute did not support renewal past the limit determined in the proceedings. The order below was modified to grant limited time for vacant possession, with rent payable at the contractual rate until delivery of possession.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the writ petition was maintainable to challenge the renewal notice arising out of the lease and statutory arrangement; (ii) whether the lessee could claim renewal of the lease beyond the renewed term under the lease deed and the Act; (iii) what relief should follow on the facts of the case.

Issue (i): whether the writ petition was maintainable to challenge the renewal notice arising out of the lease and statutory arrangement

Analysis: The dispute, though rooted in a lease, arose from the exercise of statutory power under the Act. A writ court may entertain such a matter where no complicated questions of fact require elaborate investigation, and there is no absolute bar merely because the controversy has contractual features. The objection based on delay was also not accepted as a ground to defeat relief in the circumstances.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable.

Issue (ii): whether the lessee could claim renewal of the lease beyond the renewed term under the lease deed and the Act

Analysis: The lease deed contemplated renewal and execution of a fresh lease, while the statutory provisions enabled renewal in accordance with the original terms. On the facts, the Court found it unnecessary to finally determine the wider controversy on the exact reach of the covenant and the statute. Instead, it held that the appellant could not claim renewal beyond the date fixed by the Court, and that possession had to be delivered after the extended period granted.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to claim renewal beyond 30-9-1999.

Issue (iii): what relief should follow on the facts of the case

Analysis: In view of the long pendency and the equities of the matter, the Court modified the High Court's order and granted time for handing over vacant possession, directed payment of rent at the contractual rate, and set aside the inconsistent parts of the High Court's directions.

Conclusion: The order of the High Court was modified and the appellant was granted limited time to vacate, with rent payable till delivery of possession.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent that the High Court's directions were modified, while the appellant was required to vacate after the extended period and comply with the terms fixed by the Court.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition may lie in a lease dispute when the impugned action is taken under statutory power and the case does not involve complicated factual investigation, and a covenant for renewal does not entitle renewal beyond the limit fixed by the governing contract and statute.

---