Back
I. P. MUKERJI, ANIRUDDHA ROY
Standard Chartered Bank – Appellant
Versus
Tilak Mehra – Respondent
JUDGMENT
I.P. Mukerji, J. - Facts:
1. The first appellant is the successor-in-interest of Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China. The latter on 12th December, 1905 obtained by a deed of lease commencing from 12th February, 1906 for 100 years from one Maharaj Adhiraj Bijoy Chand Mahtab Bahadoorof Burdwan, a property measuring 3 bighas, 9 cottahs, 18 chittacks, what is now, premises No. 4, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata - 700001. The respondents are the successors of the Maharaj. By two supplementary leases executed on 20th April, 1927 and 31st December, 1934 some addition was made to the demised land and the obligation to pay municipal taxes was spelled out, while maintaining the terms and conditions of the original lease.
2. The renewal clause in the lease is of paramount importance in this matter.
3. It provided that the lessee had the option, on the expiry of the original lease, to take a fresh lease of another 100 years only, at a yearly rent of Rs.3,700/- and a monthly rent which would be "1/ 12th of 71/2 % of the value of the property on the commencement of the renewed lease except the value of the private lane or road and the buildings standing on it.'
4. In terms of the covena
(1) Payment of rent – Rights and liabilities of parties arise from date of execution of lease and not from any anterior date.(2) Arbitral award – Grounds for setting aside an award are very limited.
The arbitrator must address allegations of fraud and collusion affecting the enforceability of a contract; failure to do so results in an award being set aside for patent illegality.
The court affirmed that an arbitral award can only be set aside for patent illegality, emphasizing that lessor maintained obligations under the lease despite lessee's claims. Termination due to non-p....
(1) Dispute arising out of non-renewal of lease is clearly arbitrable – Arbitration clause cannot be rendered otiose by refusal of Respondent State to renew lease.(2) Clauses in a lease deed cannot b....
The court upheld the Arbitral Award, emphasizing limited grounds for interference and confirming the validity of the Sole Arbitrator's findings regarding the Lease Deed.
The court upheld the Arbitral Award, affirming that the Sole Arbitrator's findings were plausible and did not warrant judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
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
