IMPORTANT POINT
A lawful tenant retains the right to recover possession from unauthorized occupants, and prior authority to occupy does not confer rights against the landlord.

JUDGMENT :

Krishna Rao, J.

1. The plaintiff has filed the suit against the defendants for recovery of vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises being flat no.5 on the second floor together with a godown and a garage of the building at the premises no. 36, Shakespeare Sarani (formerly known as Theatre Road), Calcutta and a decree for mesne profits against the defendant no.1 for Rs.21,90,000/-.

2. The plaintiff is a monthly tenant of Flat No.5 situated on the Second Floor of a building at the premises no.36, Shakespeare Sarani, Calcutta under the Trustees of Rai Bahadur Bissessuelal Motilal Halwasiya Trust.

3. The suit premises consists of three bed rooms, three baths, balconies, one Drawing Room, one Dining Room, one Kitchen along with store room no.13 on the first floor and covered garage no.19 on the ground floor and the said flat was furnished and was equipped with various furniture and fittings, such as, dinning table, wardrobe, sofas, writing table, ceiling fans etc.

4. On or around 25th September, 1972, the defendant no.1 (since deceased) was appointed as a Director in the plaintiff company and was subject to retirement by rotation. The defendant no.1 on the basis of such terms of employment retired by rotation but was reappointed as a Director by the shareholders of the plaintiff company at the Annual General Meetings of the plaintiff company held from time to time. The defendant no.1 finally retired at the Annual General Meeting of the Plaintiff Company held on 15th July, 1985 and as a result, the defendant no.1 ceased to be a Director of the plaintiff company.

5. Thereafter, in the month of January, 1985, whilst the defendant no.1 was a Director of the plaintiff company, the defendant no.1 approached the plaintiff that he wanted the suit premises together with the furniture and fittings installed thereat for the purpose of accommodating one of his relatives temporarily for a period of two months as the flat of his relative was under renovation and the defendant no.1 would deliver vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises immediately after the flat of his relative was renovated and in any event within two months, whichever was earlier.

6. Relying upon the representation of the defendant no.1, the plaintiff handed over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises with all furniture and fittings installed therein on undertaking/assurance to deliver vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises immediately after the flat of his relative was renovated or in any event within two months.

7. The plaintiff submits that the license, granted by the plaintiff to the defendant no.1, expired in the month of March, 1985 and the defendant no.1 was obliged to make over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises together with all furniture and fittings atleast by 31st March, 1985.

8. In the Annual General Meeting of the Company held on 15th July, 1985, the Plaintiff company did not reappoint the defendant no.1 as Director of the Company and as a result to that, the defendant no.1 ceased to be a Director of the Company on and from 15th July, 1985 and the same was duly informed by the plaintiff company to the Registrar of the Companies.

9. The defendant no.1 taken possession of the suit premises along with all furnitures and fixtures with the permission of the plaintiff and thus, the defendant cannot claim the suit premises by way of adverse possession, instead of vacating the suit premises by handing over possession to the plaintiff, the defendant no.1 has inducted various third parties, i.e. defendant nos. 2 to 7 in the suit premises and started realising substantial amounts from defendant nos.2 to 7 as purported service fees.

10. The defendant no.1 had no right, title and interest over the suit premises and has no authority to induct any third party in the suit premises. The defendant no.1 has wrongful and illegal gains from the premises by inducing defendant nos. 2 to 7 in the premises.

11. The plaintiff