IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.
Deepak Kejriwal - Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal and others - Respondents
WPO No. 518 of 2023
Decided On : 16-08-2023
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 14 - Disputed property - Lease agreement - Rent renewal - Held, respondents, in fact, acted fairly in not insisting upon enhanced payment during the period of negotiations but accepted occupation charges (by whatever name called) by issuing receipts, at previous rate - However, merely by acceptance of occupation charges and calling it "rent", as petitioner continued its occupation, does not amount to a renewal of lease between parties - In such circumstances, since there was no consensus ad idem between parties, it cannot be said that there was any renewal at all - Inasmuch as rates proposed by the respondents are concerned, there is nothing palpably absurd or exorbitant in said rates to strike down same - No part of conduct of respondents can be labelled as arbitrary or violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and, as such, no interference is called for - WP is disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has challenged a Circular dated August 18, 2022 and a communication dated January 31, 2023 made by the respondent no.1, fixing the rent payable for the first floor of the disputed property for renewal for a further period of fifteen years, at Rs.72/- per Sq.ft. per month.
2. The petitioner is carrying on a sole proprietorship business of manufacturing wooden and steel furniture as well as assembling computer products in the name of M/s. Amit Industries at the disputed property, having office at Shilpa Bhawan, First Floor at 31, Black Burn Lane, Kolkata-700 012.
3. Respondent no.2, the West Bengal Small Industries Development Corporation Limited, acts for promotion and growth of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises all over West Bengal by providing infrastructure on subsidized rates and extending marketing support to MSMEs.
4. In such backdrop, the petitioner alleges that an Allotment Letter dated September 2, 2003, was issued in favour of the petitioner on the basis of an application for allotment of an office space. In terms of the said letter, a short-term lease agreement was executed on September 29, 2003 in favour of the petitioner by the respondent no.2 for an area at the first floor of Shilpa Bhawan Commercial Complex. The petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.2,91,900/- as security deposit, equivalent to advance payment of six months' rental.
5. Subsequently, the respondent no.2 approached the petitioner for taking back a space of 1149 Sq.ft. out of the total 4865 Sq.ft. allotted initially. The petitioner, accordingly, handed over the said portion.
6. The lease period expired on September 28, 2018 and the petitioner applied for renewal of the same six months prior to the expiration of the lease-deed in terms of the renewal clause therein. The respondent no.2 replied thereto by a letter dated May 17, 2018 stating that its Board of directors had agreed to allow the petitioner to renew the 3716 Sq.ft. space for a further long term lease. It further mentioned that the tenure of the lease shall be informed to the petitioner and shall be effective after the expiry of the short term lease on September 28, 2018. The petitioner replied thereto by a letter dated July 17, 2018 and gave a break-up of the schedule towards the payment of the lease premium.
7. However, the respondent no.2 did not accept the break-up.
8. The petitioner continued to pay rent at the previous rate after the expiry of its lease, which was accepted by the respondent no.2. It is alleged that the respondent no.2 also gave rebates in terms of the expired agreement.
9. However, upon negotiations, the respondent no.2 issued a letter on January 31, 2023 intimating the terms and conditions of renewal of lease deed on short term basis for 15 years, the rent for which was being enhanced to Rs. 72/- per Sq.ft. plus GST @18% along with payment of municipal tax and a further security deposit of Rs.18,94,268/-. Outstanding dues were also claimed by the respondent no.2.
10. The petitioner has challenged such communication and the supporting Circular.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that Clause 5(vii) of the lease deed contains the renewal clause and provides that, should the lessee duly pay the installments of rent and interest and other dues and faithfully perform the conditions of the lease-deed, the lessee will be entitled to renewal of the demise for a further term of 15 years on such terms and conditions as may be agreed by and between the parties upon the lessee giving notice of such intention for such renewal at least six months prior to expiration of the period of demise then subsisting.
12. It is argued that the expression “renewal” was conferred as an entitlement of the petitioner by the said Clause. As such, the respondent no.2 is not entitled in law and as per the contract to refuse the same.
13. It is submitted that the respondent no.2 has been vacillating on the count of the tenure of the lease. However, by its correspondence, it was
M/s. Erusian Equipment & Chemicals Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and another
Dwarkadas Marfatia and sons Vs. Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay
State of U.P. and others Vs. Lalji Tandon (Dead) through LRS.
Style (Dress Land) Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh and another
National Sample Survey Organization and another Vs. Champa Properties Limited and another
State of West Bengal and others Vs. Calcutta Mineral Supply Company Private Limited and another
Joshi Technologies International INC. Vs. Union of India and others
The discretion of a landlord in rent fixation and renewal terms is valid, and tenants must adhere to clearly established lease terms, particularly when challenged during eviction proceedings.
The court emphasized that unilateral alterations to established lease terms infringe upon contractual rights and due process, reaffirming the need for transparency in public sector dealings.
The government must act fairly and reasonably when fixing lease rents, reflecting public policy, and cannot unilaterally revise contract terms against original agreements.
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.
A fixed-term lease requiring mutual agreement on rent for renewal terminates by efflux of time if such agreement is not reached. Appellate intervention is mandatory when a lower court interprets such....
The court upheld the significance of adhering to lease terms and natural justice in lease renewal matters, affirming the state's actions in rejecting the renewal request based on documented breaches.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.