2008 (9) TMI 1031 - HC - Indian Laws

Court upholds license agreement, modifies damages for delayed eviction filing, directs possession handover.

The court rejected the argument of waiver and acquiescence, maintaining the licensor-licensee relationship based on the leave and license agreement. The ... - Issues Involved:1. Waiver and Acquiescence2. Revisional Authority's Consideration3. Quantum of Damages4. Possession and CompensationSummary:Waiver and Acquiescence:The petitioner argued that the respondent's failure to issue a legal notice after the expiry of the license period and continued acceptance of monthly compensation indicated a waiver of the right to evict, treating the petitioner as a tenant. The court rejected this argument, stating that the plea of waiver must be expressly pleaded and proved. The leave and license agreement dated 25th March 2003 was conclusive proof of the licensor-licensee relationship u/s 24 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. The court held that the respondent's conduct did not convert the relationship to that of landlord and tenant.Revisional Authority's Consideration:The petitioner contended that the revisional authority failed to consider all aspects of the matter. The court found this grievance devoid of merit, noting that the revisional authority upheld the Competent Authority's decision, which was a possible view based on the evidence. The court found no fault with the revisional authority's approach in rejecting the Revision Application.Quantum of Damages:The Competent Authority had directed the petitioner to pay damages at Rs.56,000/- per month from 16th January 2005 until handing over possession. The court found this direction erroneous, as the respondent did not call upon the petitioner to vacate the premises immediately after the license period expired and filed the eviction application only on 10th December 2005. Therefore, the court modified the damages to Rs.36,000/- per month from 16th December 2005 and Rs.18,000/- per month from 16th January 2005 to 15th December 2005.Possession and Compensation:The court upheld the order directing the petitioner to hand over possession of the suit premises and allowed the respondent to appropriate the security deposit towards arrears of damages. The petitioner was granted protection of possession until 24th October 2008, subject to depositing the entire arrears in court within four weeks and filing an undertaking.Order:1. The direction to hand over possession of the suit premises is upheld.2. Damages are modified to Rs.36,000/- per month from 16th December 2005 and Rs.18,000/- per month from 16th January 2005 to 15th December 2005.3. The petitioner is entitled to adjustment of amounts already paid.4. The respondent may pursue other remedies for compensation for furniture and fixtures.5. The direction to appropriate the security deposit towards arrears is upheld.6. Petition disposed of with costs.7. Protection of possession granted until 24th October 2008, subject to conditions.