Contractual termination of leave and licence upheld, with eviction and occupation charges sustained after post-notice continued possession.

Termination of leave and licence arrangements was upheld where the agreements permitted one month's notice and the notice relied on sanctioned-plan use restrictions showing the upper floors were earmarked for car parking, not commercial use. The occupants' objection that no separate proceedings were pursued by another authority did not defeat the Resolution Professional's contractual right to terminate and seek eviction. The direction to pay unpaid licence fee or occupation charges was also sustained as consequential relief for continued occupation after termination, even though that component was not separately framed as a prayer. The orders were affirmed, with time granted only for vacant handover and the security deposit to be adjusted against outstanding dues.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Resolution Professional was justified in terminating the leave and licence arrangements and seeking eviction of the occupants. (ii) Whether the Adjudicating Authority could direct payment of unpaid licence fee or occupation charges while ordering vacation of the premises.

Issue (i): Whether the Resolution Professional was justified in terminating the leave and licence arrangements and seeking eviction of the occupants.

Analysis: The notice of termination referred to the sanctioned plan and stated that the third and fourth floors were earmarked for car parking and not for commercial use. The agreements themselves contained clauses enabling either party to terminate the arrangement on one month's notice. On that basis, the termination was held to be in accordance with the contractual terms and the objection based on absence of separate proceedings by another authority did not defeat the Resolution Professional's right to terminate.

Conclusion: The termination and the direction to vacate were upheld against the appellants.

Issue (ii): Whether the Adjudicating Authority could direct payment of unpaid licence fee or occupation charges while ordering vacation of the premises.

Analysis: The direction to pay the unpaid amount was treated as a consequential relief flowing from the continued occupation after termination. The occupants had retained possession beyond the notice period while the premises remained under their use, and the grant of such relief did not cause any legal prejudice merely because a separate prayer for that component was not specifically framed.

Conclusion: The direction to pay unpaid licence fee or occupation charges was sustained.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were affirmed, the appeals failed, and the occupants were granted time only for handing over vacant possession with adjustment of the security deposit against outstanding dues.

Ratio Decidendi: A termination made in accordance with the contractual notice clause and supported by the stated use restrictions can justify eviction in insolvency proceedings, and consequential payment of occupation charges may be directed when occupation continues after termination.

---