( 1 ) BY this order I will dispose of I. A. 12174/96 under Order 12 Rule 6 read with Section 151 Civil Procedure Code filed by the plaintiffs to grant a decree of possession of the suit premises on admission.

( 2 ) THIS application has been filed in a suit for possession, and for arrears of rent, damages and mesne profits filed by the plaintiff against the defendants.

( 3 ) IT appears that plaintiffs 3 to 6 are the owners of property No. C-6/8, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi. Plaintiffs I and 2 are their parents and the property was purchased when one of the plaintiff was minor, her mother acting as her guardian and plaintiff No. 1 has been looking after/managing the properly.

( 4 ) THE property was given by plaintiff No. 1 on behalf of the owners to defendant No. 1, Trust for running a Nursing Home by means of an "agreement of Collaboration" dated 5. 1. 1984 executed between the partics. It provided that this agreement will be for a period of 39 months commencing from 1. 1. 1983 and the defendants were to pay to the plaintiffs a share of 20% of the gross receipts earned by the Nursing Horne subject to a minimum of Rs. 20,000. 00 per month but it was also agreed that for first three years only 50% of this minimum amount of Rs. 20,000. 00 per month was payable by the defendants. Subsequently, this term was extended for a period of three years w. e. f. 1. 4. 1986 to 31. 3. 1989 and the amount payable was increased to Rs. 30,000. 00 per month. Before the expiry of this term plaintiffs by means of notice dated 16. 2. 1989 terminated the collaboration agreement and required the defendants to vacate the premises on 31. 3. 1989 and failing which they will be liable to pay Rupees one lac per month as rent for use and occupation alongwith interest till the vacation of the premises.

( 5 ) THE defendants acknowledged this notice in their reply dated 26. 4. 1989 and denied that they were liable to vacate the premises. The plaintiffs have accordingly filed the present suit claiming rent for the month of March, 1989 and damages for the period from 1. 4. 1989 onward at the rate of Rs. 60,000. 00 per month alongwith interest at the rate of 18% per annum and also for possession of the properly. The defendants have filed the written statement and have disputed and denied the suit claim of the plaintiff. It is not disputed that the plaintiffs had given the premises to the defendants under collaboration agreement dated 5. 1. 1984. It is also not denied that the monthly minimum charges were increased to Rs. 30,000. 00 from 1. 4. 1986 to 31. 3. 1989 by mutual agreement. However, it is alleged that this period of 3 years was extended for the purpose of sharing of the money/minimum guarantee under the collaboration agreement and period was not extended by three years which was for an indefinite period so long as the defendants run the Nursing Home and the defendants are not liable to vacate the premises so long as they arc running the Nursing Home nor they are liable to pay damages or interest as claimed. Other legal picas have also been taken.

( 6 ) ON the pleadings of the parlies the following issues were framed on July 30, 1996:-

"1. Whether the suit is not properly valued for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction?. . . . . . . . (OPD) 2. Whether the termination of the Collaboration Agreement vide letter dated 16. 2. 1989 is illegal, void and of no consequence?. . . . . . . . (OPD) 3. Whether the Collaboration Agreement was for an indefinite period?. . . . . . . . (OPE)) 4. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the possession of building and premises No. C-6/8, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi?. . . . . . . . (OPP) 5. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to any rent, interest as well as damages and mesne profits from the defendants, if so, for which period and at what rate?. . . . . . . . (OPP) 6. Relief.

( 7 ) BEFORE the case was fixed for trial plaintiffs have filed the present application. Reply has been filed on