Back
High Court Of Calcutta
VIDYA NAND
RANJIT KUMAR DUTTA - Appellant
Versus
TAPAN KUMAR SHAW - Respondent
FIRST APPEAL 149 Of 1994
Decided On : 03/06/1997
WEST BENGAL PREMISES TENANCY ACT, 1956 - LEASE - RENEWAL - EXTENSION - DISTINCTION - EFFECT OF CONTINUANCE IN POSSESSION UNDER RENEWAL OR EXTENSION CLAUSE - SECTION 116 OF THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882.
Fact of the Case:
The suit premises were leased to the defendant for an initial period of 15 years from 1st October 1956 to 30th September 1971 at a monthly rent of Rs. 700/-. The lease deed contained an option for renewal for a further period of 15 years, subject to the lessee giving the lessor a 3-month notice in writing before the expiration of the initial term. The defendant exercised the option and continued in possession after the expiry of the initial period, but no fresh deed of lease was executed. The plaintiffs, the lessors, filed a suit for possession and mesne profits after the expiry of the renewed period of 30 years.
Finding of the Court:
1. The lease was for a period of 15 years and did not fall short of that period, despite being registered on a subsequent date. 2. The deed of lease contained both a renewal clause and an extension clause. 3. Renewal of a lease is the creation of a fresh lease and requires registration, but continuance in possession under a renewal or extension clause without a fresh registered deed is deemed to be under the original registered lease. 4. Extension of a lease is the prolongation or extension of the old lease and does not require a fresh deed of lease. 5. In the instant case, the defendant continued in possession under the renewal/extension clause of the original registered deed of lease, and his tenancy was not governed by the provisions of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. 6. The lease expired by efflux of time after 30 years, and the plaintiffs were entitled to possession and mesne profits.
Issues: 1. Whether the lease, as per registered deed dated 8th of October, 1956 for an initial period of 15 years commencing from 1st of October, 1956 to 30th of September, 1971 fell short of 15 years so as to be governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 and to entitle the tenantappellant to the benefits secured under the said Act? 2. Whether the said lease would be deemed to have expired by efflux of time on the expiry of the initial period of 15 years in the year 1971 as the lease was not renewed by virtue of a registered deed and as such the defendant-appellants' continuing in possession of the demised premises thereafter and paying the rent would be deemed to be holding over the same under S. 116 of the Transfer of Property Act, and accordingly the tenancy would be governed under the provisions of West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The distinction between renewal and extension of a lease is that renewal creates a fresh lease while extension prolongs the old lease. 2. Continuance in possession under a renewal or extension clause without a fresh registered deed is deemed to be under the original registered lease. 3. Section 116 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 applies only after the determination of the lease, and not before or where the occupation of the tenancy continues under the old registered lease after exercise of option.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court were confirmed. There was no order for costs.
( 1 ) THIS appeal has been assigned to me by the Hon'ble, The Chief Justice on difference of opinions of the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Babu Lall Jain and the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sidheshwar Narayan.
( 2 ) THE following two questions were raised by the tenant/appellant in this appeal - (i) Whether the lease, as per registered deed dated 8th of October, 1956 for an initial period of 15 years commencing from 1st of October, 1956 to 30th of September, 1971 fell short of 15 years so as to be governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 and to entitle the tenantappellant to the benefits secured under the said Act? (ii) Whether the said lease would be deemed to have expired by efflux of time on the expiry of the initial period of 15 years in the year 1971 as the lease was not renewed by virtue of a registered deed and as such the defendant-appellants' continuing in possession of the demised premises thereafter and paying the rent would be deemed to be holding over the same under S. 116 of the Transfer of Property Act, and accordingly the tenancy would be governed under the provisions of West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956?
( 3 ) BEFORE finding out answers to the questions raised in this appeal it would be desirable to know the facts of the case which are as follows :-A registered deed of lease dated 8th of October, 1956 was executed between plaintiff No. 1 and the defendant and by and under the said deed the defendant was holding as a lessee in respect of one room, privy and bath room in the ground floor. The lease was initially for 15 years commencing from 1st October, 1956 and terminating on 30-1171 at a monthly rent of Rs. 700/- payable according to English Calender with an option, on the part of the lessee to renew the same for a further period of 15 years. The lease also provided inter alia that if the lessee shall be desirous of having the lease hereby granted renewed for a further period of 15 years, the lessee shall at least three calender months before the expiration of the term thereby granted, give the lessor in writing notice of his intention to make such renewed lease and the lessor shall be bound to renew the same at the lessee's cost.
( 4 ) THE said deed of lease (Ext. A0 also contains a clause that at the termination of the tenancy after the period of 15 years, or 30 years if the period be extended hereafter of this demised premises to yield up quite peaceful possession of the demised premises and the said privy and bath room in as good condition as the same are now reasonable and wear and tear and damage by fire, storm, earthquake, riot, political disturbances, violence of any army or mob, war or the consequences thereof, air raid or any irresistible force and act of God excepted. It also contains the clause that if at any time hereafter the property be acquired by the Calcutta Improvement Trust or the Corporation of Calcutta or any other Government or Public Body during the period of this lease or its extended period as the case may be, this lease shall be determined and the entire compensation for such acquisition shall belong to the lessor and the 1 lessee shall have no claim thereto.
( 5 ) THE Advocate for the defendant-appellant wrote a letter on 27-1-1971 to the plaintiff expressing the intention of the defendant of having the lease renewed for a further period of 15 years, as the same was going to expire on 30th day of September, 1971. This was done keeping in view of the provisions in the lease deed providing 3 month's notice in writing before the expiry of the lease provided renewal was intended. No step was taken for execution and/or registration of new lease deed as per the renewal clause. The lessee continued in possession in exercise of his right of renewal or extension contained in the original registered (feed after expiry of the initial period of 15 years although no document was registered. The lessor, however, also continued to accept the rent even after the expiry of the per
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
