Back
2016 Supreme(Guj) 1816
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R. SUBHASH REDDY AND VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, JJ.
Kundla Press & Oil Mill Pvt. Ltd. Thro Director Bharatbhai B - Appellant
Vs.
State of Gujarat Thro Secretary & Ors. - Respondents
Letters Patent Appeal No. 797 of 2016 In Special Civil Application No. 352 of 2013
Decided On : 06-09-2016
For the Appellant : Mr. Ashish M. Dagli.
For the Respondents: Mr. Deepak P. Sanchela.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that commercial use of the land and significant profits earned by the petitioner warranted the dismissal of the petition.
Headnote:
lease - land dispute - Gujarat Municipalities Act, Section 65(2), Circulars dated 19.05.1988 and 25.10.1990 - The court discussed the lease dispute over a land granted to a petitioner-company, the renewal of lease, and the construction carried out on the land. The key legal provisions referenced and discussed by the court include Section 65(2) of the Gujarat Municipalities Act and Circulars dated 19.05.1988 and 25.10.1990.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner-company sought to challenge the order dismissing their petition regarding the renewal of lease for a land granted to them, and the construction carried out on the land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had used the land for commercial purposes and earned significant profits, and therefore dismissed the petition.
Issues: The issues revolved around the renewal of lease, construction carried out on the land, and the commercial use of the land by the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's commercial use of the land and earning of significant profits warranted the dismissal of the petition.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision to dismiss the petition.
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.
By way of this appeal, which is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellant-original petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 23.06.2016 passed by the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 352 of 2013 by which the learned single Judge has dismissed the petition.
2. The factual matrix of the present case is as under;
2.1 The land admeasuring 28,176 Sq. Metres falling within Gamtal of Savarkundla was given to the petitioner-Company on lease for a period of 30 years in the year 1922. The District Collector, Bhavnagar, vide order dated 06.09.1955, gave approval to respondent no. 3-Municipality to grant the land in question on lease to the petitioner. During the existence of the lease period, a dispute arose between the parties with regard to grant of permission for carrying out construction activity on the land in question. The dispute was referred to the Arbitrator, who passed an award on 23.03.1978 The said award became a decree on 26.04.1978, in pursuance of the decree passed by the Civil Court (S.D), Bhavnagar in Special Civil Suit No. 48 of 1978.
2.2 The respondent no. 1, vide order dated 2 3.10.1991, extended the lease period for a period of thirty years with effect from 01.04.1982 Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the action of respondent no. 1 extending the period of lease, respondent no. 3-Municipality filed Special Civil Application No. 1968 of 1992 before this Court. The said petition came to be dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 20.07.2002 A restoration application was filed by respondent no. 3-Municipality, which was dismissed on 06.07.2005
2.3 It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner requested the respondent no. 3-Municipality to comply with the consent decree passed by the Civil Court on 26.04.1978 However, the respondent no. 3-Municipality refused to accept the lease rent in terms of the decree and on the contrary, raised bills for arrears of rent. Even after completion of 30 years of lease period, the respondent no. 3-Municipality did not enter into any lease agreement for renewal of lease. The petitioner, therefore, filed Special Civil Application No. 22772 of 2006 seeking direction against the respondent no.3-Municipality to renew the lease of the land in question as well as adjoining land, as per the consent decree passed by the Civil Court. This Court by order dated 21.03.2007 disposed of the aforesaid petition with a direction to respondent no. 3-Municipality to comply the consent decree.
2.4 In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court, the respondent no.3-Municipality entered into a lease agreement with the petitioner vide agreement dated 12.02.2007 The lease period of 30 years got over in the year 2012 and therefore, the petitioner made a representation to the respondent no.3-Municipality to extend the period of lease for a further period of 30 years. However, in the General Meeting held on 23.03.2012, the respondent no.3-Municipality passed a Resolution to the effect that the application of the petitioner for renewal of lease has been rejected on the ground that the land in question is required for other public purposes.
2.5 The petitioner, therefore, filed Special Civil Application No. 353 of 2012 before this Court wherein, the petitioner prayed for the following reliefs;
“(A) That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit this petition.
(B) That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this Special Civil Application by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction to Municipality directing him to renew lease of land in possession of the petitioner bearing Survey No. 452/19 of City Savarkundla admeasuring 28,176 sq. metres as well as adjoining land admeasuring 1 acre 2 Gunthas as per consent decree.
ALTERNATIVELY
Your Lordships may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for quashing and setting aside the resolution passed by respondent no. 3 in the general meeti
