The main legal point established in the judgment is that the expiration of a lease, suppression of material facts, and the effect of holding over under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 were central to the court's decision.

JUDGMENT

Suvra Ghosh, J. - The prayers of the petitioners in the writ petition are as follows:-

'(a) A WRIT of and/or in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents, each one of them, their servants, agents and/or assigns to handover vacant and peaceful possession of petitioners' land, situate at holding no. 57, 58, premises no. 281, Ward No. 20, South Dum Dum Municipality, Kolkata - 700 089 an area of 6 Cottach and 43 Sq.Ft. (approx) to the petitioners, forthwith;

(b) A WRIT of and/or in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents, each one of them, their servants, agents and/or assigns to make payment of occupational charges of petitioners' land for the period from 30.06.1995 till the date of handing over possession of the land with admissible rate of interest, forthwith;'

2. The mother in law of the petitioners Sefali Ghosh, since deceased and one Saila Rani Ghosh were joint owners in respect of an area of 12 Cottahs 43 Sq.ft of land in holding no. 57,58 premises no. 281 under ward no. 20, South Dum Dum Municipality, Kolkata- 700089. By virtue of a deed of lease executed on 19th October, 1968, the said land was leased out to the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, the first respondent herein, for a period of 10 years with effect from 1st July, 1968, renewable for 10 years in two phases and the lease expired on 30th June, 1995. By virtue of a registered deed of partition executed between the co owners on 15th March, 1969, the property was equally divided into two parts, lot A and lot B and the mother in law of the petitioners acquired absolute title in respect of 50% of the property comprising an area of 6 cottahs 43 Sq.ft. The respondents, by a letter issued on 6th June, 1994, exercised their option for purchasing the land in question and requested both the owners to make out the marketable title and take further action in terms of the lease deed. Before expiry of the lease period, the predecessor of the petitioners intimated the respondents that she was not inclined to renew or continue with the lease and the respondents were requested to vacate the premises in terms of the deed of lease upon expiry of the term of the lease. The said owner was willing to offer her portion of the premises for sale in favour of the respondents at the present market value of the property and rent offered by the respondents was refused by the said predecessor. The petitioners' predecessor-in-interest, since deceased, gifted the property in favour of the petitioners by virtue of a registered deed of gift dated 27th May, 2011 and upon acquiring title in respect of 50% share of the entire land, the petitioners expressed their desire to sell out the property to the respondents through several communications which fell on deaf ears.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that by a letter issued on 6th June, 1994 the respondents exercised option of purchase of the plot in question and requested the owners to make out a marketable title and to take further action in terms of the lease. The petitioners' predecessor, being the absolute owner of lot B, informed the respondents by a letter dated 21st June, 1995 that she was not inclined to renew or continue with the lease and no rent would be accepted from the respondents from July, 1995. The respondents were requested to vacate the premises and hand over peaceful vacant possession of the same in terms of the deed of lease. Execution of deed of gift by Shefali Ghosh, since deceased, in favour of the petitioners was intimated to the respondents and the petitioners also made a similar request to the respondents by a letter dated 9th October, 2020. Learned counsel has taken the Court to the terms of the deed of lease annexed to the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners and has submitted that the lease has expired on 30th June, 1995 in view of the terms laid down therein. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the following authorities in support of his contention:-

(i)