( 1 ) THE present suit is filed for a decree of declaration that the defendant has no right, title or interest to carry on the business of Messrs. Narshi Hansraj or any other business in the suit premises namely, Shop No. 7-B, Navratan Villa, 279a, Lakhamshi Napu Road, Matunga, Bombay 400 019 and that he is a trespasser in respect thereof. By prayer clauses (c) and (d) a decree for possession couched in the form of mandatory as well as prohibitory injunction has been sought. Prayer clause (e) seeks a decree for a sum of Rs. 9,900/- towards the arrears of royalty for a period from 1. 11. 1978 to 2. 12. 1979 at the rate of Rs. 750/- per month. By prayer clause (f) damages in the form of compensation or future mesne profits at the rate of rs. 25/- per day has been sought. There are various other interim reliefs in the present suit.

( 2 ) SOME of the material facts, briefly enumerated are as under :-

( 3 ) THE original plaintiff Lakchand Dhanji Shah was an executor appointed under a will dated 19. 3. 1977 of one Narshi Hansraj Khona alias Sha narshi Hansraj who expired in Bombay on 12. 10. 1978. The said original plaintiff who was the executor has also expired and his legal heir has been brought on record.

( 4 ) IT is the case of the plaintiff that prior to 3. 11. 1967 the said original plaintiff Lakmichand dhanji Shah, the defendant Naranji Lalji Khona and one Manekji Lalji Lalka were carrying on business in partnership in the name and style of Messrs. Narshi hansraj. The said partnership firm was dealing in grains and grocery items. The said partnership firm was dissolved with effect from 3. 11. 1967 and all the assets and liabilities of the said firm were taken over by the said deceased Narshi Hansraj Khona and thus he became entitled to the said business. A deed of dissolution was executed between the parties on 15. 11. 1967.

( 5 ) IT is the case of the plaintiff that since the deceased Narshi Hansraj Khona was not in a position to carry on the business he entered into a conducting agreement with the defendant for a period of three years from 3. 11. 1967 to 2. 11. 1970 on the terms and conditions mutually agreed upon between the said deceased Narshi Hansraj Khona and the defendant herein. The said terms and conditions of the conducting agreement were reduced in writing and the said was executed between the parties in or about November, 1967. It is the case of the plaintiff that under the terms and conditions of the said conducting agreement it is inter alia provided that the said agreement will be for a period of three years i. e. from 3. 11. 1967 to 2. 11. 1970. Under clause 3 of the said agreement it has been recorded that the conductor i. e. the defendant herein has been given possession of running business, the stock-in-trade, furniture, fixtures and other articles and things relating to the said business a list whereof is annexed to the said agreement. The annexure to the said agreement shows the stock-in-trade of the sum of Rs. 15,754. 34 of the various items as set out therein. It also contains details of the furnitures and fixtures of the said shop premises. Under clause 7 of the said agreement it was provided that the said agreement is entered into for the purpose of running the business on the basis of royalty amount due and payable under the agreement and the conductor shall have the user of the said premises under leave and licence and no sub-tenancy rights are created in favour of the conductor or are intended to be created in favour of the conductor. It has been further mentioned that the mere right to use the said premises for the purpose of running the said business is allowed under the said leave and licence. There are various other terms and conditions of the said agreement. It is the case of the plaintiff that under the terms and conditions of the said agreement the business and the shop premises were handed over to the defendant and the defendant agreed to pay monthly royalty charges of Rs. 750/- for conduct

Click Here to Read the rest of this document