The main legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of the agreement and the intention of the parties determine the relationship between the parties, and the court's decision is influenced by the legal provisions of the Rent Control Act, Small Cause Courts Act, and the Easements Act.

The Petitioner, original Respondent, alleged occupant/trespasser, has challenged the Award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Arbitration Act) of sole Arbitrator dated 24 April 2009. The operative part of the Award is as under:-

“a) The Respondent shall forthwith cease to use the facilities granted by the claimant to the Respondent and described in the agreement dated 22 August 2002.

b) The Respondent do pay to the claimant a sum of Rs. 1,89,000/-for the months of March, April and May 2005.

c) The Respondent do pay to the claimant a sum of Rs. 2961000/-for wrongful use of the facilities for the period 1 June 2005 to 30 April 2009. In case the Respondent ceases to use and surrenders the facilities before 30 April 2009, it will pay lesser amount calculated at the rate of Rs. 2100/-per day for non user.

d) The Respondent do pay to the claimant at the rate of Rs. 63000/-per month from 1 May 2009 till it ceases to use and surrenders the facilities granted under the agreement dated 22 August 2002.

e) The Respondent do pay to the claimant Rs. 244504/-for electricity bills upto and inclusive of the bill dated 23 May 2007. For the subsequent period the claimant will forward to the Respondent a copy of all the bills received till the date of this award and a voucher at 60% of the bill. The Respondent do pay an amount equivalent to 60% of the electricity bill within one week of the receipt of the voucher with a copy of the bill. For the future period the claimant will forward to the Respondent a copy of all the bills received and a voucher at 60% of the electricity within one week of the receipt of the voucher with the bill.

f) The Respondent do pay to the claimant interest on the amounts mentioned in b) to d) above @ 18 % p.a from the date of the award till payment or realization.

g) The Respondent do pay to the claimant interest @ 18% p.a on the amounts that may become due for electricity bills received after the date of the award from the expiry of one week after the receipt of the vouchers with a copy of the bill if not paid within one week of receipt.

h) The Respondent do pay to the claimant costs of this arbitration fixed at Rs.500000/-.”

2 The following were the issues before the learned Arbitrator:

Issues Answers

1. Whether the Agreement was

executed to create a tenancy by way

of license in favour of the Respondent

and the Small Causes Court will have Negative

the exclusive jurisdiction to entertain

and try the issue and not the

Arbitrator?

Negative. They contained some of

2. Whether the letters dated 19th the preliminary condition. The

August, 2002 and 20th August, 2002 were basic conditions of the Agreement dated 22nd August 2002? agreement dated 22nd August 2002 was signed after taking into considerationsuch conditions.

3. Whether the claimant did not provide five telephone connections exclusively for the use of the Respondent as per clause 7 ofthe Agreement? Negative. The claimant did provide.

4. Whether the Agreement dated 22nd August, 2002 was not to be acted upon and not acted upon? Negative.

5. Whether the said Agreement was purelyto create a license in favour of the Respondent? Negative.

6. Whether the real intention of the partieswas to let the said premises? Negative.

7. Whether the Respondent was in exclusivepossession of the premises? Negative.

8. Whether the Respondent is entitled to damages to the tune of Rs. 2 crores? Negative.

9. Whether the Claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 24,30,000/? The claimant is entitled to claim compensation in the sum of Rs.2430000/-. The claimant is entitled to the amounts awarded.

10. Whether the Claimant is entitled to mesne profit of Rs.90,000/-? The claimant is entitled to claim @ Rs.63000/-p.m.

11. Whether the Claimant is entitled to an order directing the Respondent to cease usage of the facilities and surrender facilities? Yes.

12. Whether the Agreement was the Business Service Centre Agreement permitting