Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.
Vijai Shree Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Board Of Trustees Of The Port Of Kolkata And Others - Respondent
IA No. GA2/2019 (Old No.GA/1714/2019), 4/2021 In WPO No. 533 of 2017, 1281 of 2021
Decided On : 04-04-2022
Land Policy - Lease - Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971 - [FROR] - [Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971, Sections 4, 7, 5, 41] - The court discussed the Land Policy Guidelines for Land Management by Major Ports, 2014, and its provisions including Clause 11.3(c) for renewal of existing leases, Clause 12(G) for imposition of penalty or cancellation of lease, and Sub-Clause (h) of Clause 11.3 for compensation for wrongful use and occupation. The court also highlighted the legal principles related to the First Right of Refusal (FROR) and the authority of the Estate Officer under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was granted a monthly tenancy by the Kolkata Port Trust (KoPT) and subsequently sought a long-term lease. Disputes arose regarding outstanding rent, unauthorized occupation charges, and alleged breaches of lease terms. The court analyzed the parties' contentions and the actions taken by the KoPT, including eviction notices and proceedings under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's lease was subject to the Land Policy Guidelines, and the KoPT's actions were within the authority granted by the guidelines and the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971. The court emphasized the importance of the show-cause notices and the jurisdiction of the Estate Officer to adjudicate the disputes.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's entitlement to a long-term lease, alleged breaches of lease terms, unauthorized occupation charges, and the authority of the KoPT and the Estate Officer under the Land Policy Guidelines and the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the Land Policy Guidelines and the relevant provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971. It emphasized the significance of the show-cause notices and the jurisdiction of the Estate Officer in adjudicating the disputes.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions, allowing both parties to present their contentions before the Estate Officer in the proceedings under Sections 5 and 7 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971. The court clarified that the merits of the proceedings were not entered into and would be decided in accordance with the law by the Estate Officer and any subsequent appellate authority.
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioner was granted a monthly tenancy on November 8, 1989 by the Kolkata Port Trust (KoPT) in respect of Plate Nos. HL-201, HL-202, HL-223, HL-224 and six Way Leave Plates under Plate Nos. HL-192/1, HL-193, HL-219, HL-220, HL-221 and HL-222. The petitioner contends that the KoPT offered to grant 99 years' lease to the petitioner with effect from October 1, 2003, subject to certain conditions. Subsequently, upon communications being exchanged between the parties, the petitioner accepted such offer on June 28, 2004 on the terms as recorded in the communication of even date.
2. Subsequently, Proceeding No. 1415 of 2013 was initiated for eviction of the petitioner by the KoPT under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) act, 1971 (for short, 'the 1971 act'). However, on May 29, 2015, the Estate Officer dismissed the same upon holding that the petitioner's monthly lease/tenancy was subsisting and the petitioner was not an unauthorised occupant.
3. Subsequently, the petitioner renewed its prayer for grant of long-term lease. The respondents claimed an amount of Rs. 70,74,845/- as outstanding rent. On December 18, 2015, the respondents agreed in writing to grant the petitioner First Right of Refusal (FROR) for 30 years' lease in case the petitioner cleared all outstanding amounts. The petitioner, on January 25, 2016, paid off the amount. From august, 2016, the respondents started raising bills for compensation charges on the ground of unauthorised occupation of the petitioner at three times the normal rate of rent.
4. WPO No.533 of 2017 was filed on September 4, 2017, inter alia, praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to start the process of granting lease in favour of the petitioner, for declaration that all bills raised by the KoPT, treating the petitioner as unauthorised occupant, are bad and illegal and to be quashed and for ancillary reliefs. On September 13, 2017 a co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed an interim order in WPO No.533 of 2017, permitting the petitioner to pay rent at the single rate to the KoPT-authorities and to deposit a sum of Rs. 18,00,000/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakh) with the KoPT-authorities within September 18, 2017. The petitioner was thereafter permitted to continue to pay the single rate of rent within seven days from the date of raising of the bills. It was further stipulated that, in the event of failure of payment of any rent as directed, the KoPT-authorities would be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings for eviction of the petitioner. The entire directions of payment and deposit were, however, clarified to be wholly without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties.
5. Such payment was made by the petitioner subsequently and on November 10, 2017, the respondents disclosed in paragraphs 3(xi) to 3(xiv) of their affidavit-in-opposition filed in WPO No.533 of 2017 that the subject property would be placed for auction on the upcoming date and the petitioner would have FROR for granting 30 years of long-term lease. On March 6, 2019, WPO No.533 of 2017 was disposed of by the learned Single Judge by recording the agreement of the respondents to grant such FROR for 30 years' lease to the petitioner and laying down the timelines for grant of fresh lease.
6. Subsequently, a contempt petition was taken out by the petitioner for alleged non-compliance of the order dated March 6, 2019 by the respondents. The respondents, on the other hand, filed an application, bearing Ga No.1714 of 2019, thereby seeking a modification of the order dated March 6, 2019 by directing the petitioner to pay Rs.69,92,790.97p. The respondents also prayed for extension of the time for initiation of the tender-cum-auction process till the petitioner pays off the outstanding dues for enabling the KoPT to start the process of lease.
7. On July 29, 2019, the Expression of Interest (EOI) was published by the respondents in respect of the subject property, containing the FROR
The pending proceeding before the Estate Officer was the appropriate forum for adjudication of disputed factual issues.
The conditions required to be a "sitting occupant" under the KoPT's notice and the applicability of the doctrine of promissory estoppel.
The provisions of the Transfer of Property Act and Rent Control Act are not applicable to public premises covered by the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971.
The judgment establishes the principle that sitting occupants covered by a notice granting 'first right of refusal' in an auction can participate in the auction without vacating the premises, provide....
Government retains the right to cancel lease agreements for non-payment of rent and violations of established conditions under statutory regulations.
The existence of a concluded contract requires a definite offer, acceptance, and consideration, and the absence of such elements precludes the formation of a binding agreement.
Tenants under the West Bengal Government Premises (Tenancy Regulation) Act, 1976 are entitled to renewal of lease upon payment of arrears, and eviction requires proper notice.
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
