IMPORTANT POINT
A lease agreement requires a fresh deed for renewal; automatic renewal is not valid without it.

JUDGMENT :

Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.

Vide order dated 08.12.2022, the RSA No. 5/2022 was designated as lead matter and for the sake of convenience, the facts are also extracted from RSA No. 5/2022.

2. This is the appellant’s/defendant’s second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 23.10.2021, passed by the Additional District Judge-03 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi affirming the judgment and decree dated 31.05.2018 and 04.08.2018 respectively passed by the Court of the Civil Judge-III (West) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Civil Suit No.606909/2016, whereby, the suit for recovery of possession of immoveable property and mesne profits of the respondent/plaintiff was decreed.

3. The facts of the case would show that the respondent/plaintiff instituted the civil suit against the appellant/defendant seeking recovery of possession of immovable property and mesne profits. The parties to the civil suit appeared to have entered into the lease deed dated 23.08.1994 with respect to tenancy of property i.e. Flat No.204E, situated on the 2nd floor in the building known as Milap Niketan at 8-A Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi, measuring about 350 sq. ft. of super area along with right of bathroom and use of passage, stairs, lifts, entrance etc. The tenancy commenced on 14.01.1994 at the monthly rent of Rs. 10,584/- for the initial period of three years. The lease deed contained a renewal clause after the expiry of the initial lease period.

4. According to the plaint, after the expiry of the initial period of tenancy, the appellant/defendant neither vacated the suit property nor exercised the right of getting the lease renewed, which compelled the respondent/plaintiff to terminate the tenancy vide notice dated 21.07.1998. The respondent/plaintiff also claimed mesne profits/damages for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 43,750/- per month. In addition, the claim for damages and interest on the payment till the date of actual payment was also claimed.

5. The appellant/defendant contested the said civil suit on various grounds. It was claimed that the tenancy of the appellant/defendant subsisted and the respondent/plaintiff had no right for the recovery of possession and the rent as per the agreement, was being paid by the appellant/defendant.

6. During the pendency of the said civil suit, it has come on record in an order dated 29.09.2004 that the respondent/plaintiff has taken possession of the suit property and therefore, the issue pertaining to the relief of possession did not require adjudication. Vide order dated 10.08.1999, the following issues were framed by the Trial Court:-

“1. Whether the tenancy of the defendant is to determine by efflux of time from the expire of three years as alleged by the plaintiff? OPP

2. Whether the tenancy of the defendant have been validly terminated through notice of termination: of tenancy u/s 106 of Transfer of Property Act?OPP

3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages for use and occupation? if so, at what rate?OPP

4. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any amount on account of increase of municipal tax? if so, at what amount? OPP

5. Whether the defendant had validly exercise the option to renew the lease period vide letter dt. 17.10.1996, as pleaded in the written statement, if so, its effects? OPD

6. Relief.”

7. In order to prove the case, the respondent/plaintiff himself appeared as PW1 and Mr. K.K. Verma was examined as PW2. The appellant/defendant, however, examined four witnesses. With respect to issue No.1, the Trial Court had held that after the termination of three years from 14.01.1994, the appellant/defendant did not have any right to continue with the possession.

8. The Trial Court after appreciating the material available on record and after perusal of Clause 4 of the agreement dated 23.08.1994 had held that until and unless a fresh lease deed was executed after the expiry of three years, the appellant/defendant did not have any automatic right for the continuation of the tenancy