The word 'shop' in a restrictive covenant should be given a narrow meaning.

( 1 ) RESPONDENT plaintiff was granted lease of a plot in 1941 by Delhi Improvement Trust in Pahar Gunj for construction of shop and residence without specifying which portion would be used as shop. The plaintiff let out 1st floor to a bank and D. D. A. objected to it and besides levying penalty threatened cancellation of lease. Plaintiff Sued for Injunction which was dismissed by trial Court but was decreed in appeal. D. D. A. then filed R. S. A. High Court held that as the lease did not specify as to which portion or floor was to be used for shops and residence, the lessee could use any portion for any purpose. After giving above facts, judgment para 6 onwards is :-

( 2 ) IN the sense that the restriction in this case is only regarding the utilization of the property as shops and residential flat, it must be said that the building cannot be used for any other purpose and it is only a user contrary to this restriction which can lead to conclusion that the convenant has been infringed. The lease is not infringed if there is a residence on the ground floor, first floor, second floor etc. nor is the covenant infringed if there are shops on the ground floor, first floor, second floor etc. , The reason for this is that the covenant does not indicate where the shops or residences are to be located. Thus, the lease in the present case is not infringed merely because there is a shop or something similar on the first floor.

( 3 ) I now take up the alternative line of argument on behalf of the appellant, which is that the only permissible user of the building is for shop or residential flat and the use of the property for a bank is not a user either as a shop or as a residence. This is an important and interesting point, because it is based on the meaning of the word shop . As urged by the learned counsel for the appellant, a shop is normally understood as place where one sells goods and buys goods. It is a kind of place where normally consumer goods are sold and, therefore, it cannot include premises which are used for running a bank, or place where sophisticated commercial activity is carried on, as opposed to dealing in normal day-to-day goods of house-hold utility or personal utility. There may be shops dealing with other things also, but the common feature of shop is that some commodities or goods, may be even valuable commodities of goods are bought or sold. This is a meaning which is quite commonly given to the word shop . The learned counsel has also referred to the Full Bench decision in Ram Chunder v. The State, 1963 P. L. R. 1, wherein Full Bench interpreted the Punjab Shops and Establishments Act, 1958 for the purpose of finding out whether a godown was a shop or a commercial establishment. It was there observed that a shop was a place where goods are ordinarily bought and sold and a commercial establishment was a place wherein organised trade or business was carried on for profit. Although, the Court accepted the meaning of shop in the narrow sense in which it is commonly used, I must not over-look the fact that the judgment was given in the context of the Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, because therein some special statutory definitions are used. In order to interpret contract made in 1941, as is the case here, one must understand the meaning of the word shop and residential flat as understood not by the parties or by the legislature when passing some other law, but by the usage of these words. To my mind a shop is a place where business is carried on. It may be a place where goods are ordinarily sold or even bought, but is does not exclude other places where business is carried on. For example, it is common to refer to a work place as a workshop or indeed there are many other type of shops where goods need not be sold. These may be used for booking agencies, pawn brokers, money-lenders and so on. Such shops are not necessarily selling goods. The word shop is often used to describe places wh