(1) What are the circumstances in which a licence can become irrevocable?

(2) Can a licence be made irrevocable on agreement of parties?

(3) Whether Section 62 is subject to the provisions contained in Section 60 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882?

These are the main questions arise for consideration in this Second Appeal.

2. Challenging the judgment and decree passed by the II Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam in A.S. No.41/2012, the plaintiff in O.S. No.860/2010 of the II Additional Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam has come up in Second Appeal.

3. Suit is one for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant and his men and agents from dispossessing the plaintiff from the plaint schedule property, demolishing the community hall constructed therein and doing anything detrimental to the rights of the plaintiff over the plaint schedule property. The plaintiff is the Lions Club, Thrikkakkara.

4. The trial court, after recording evidence and hearing either side, decreed the suit in terms of the plaint. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the defendant, Greater Cochin Development Authority (GCDA), went in appeal through A.S. No.41/2012. The lower appellate court, after hearing both sides, allowed the appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, and dismissed the suit.

5. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant handed over 40 cents of land belongs to the defendant, to the plaintiff through Ext.A1 licence deed No.334/89 of the Thrikkakkara Sub Registry. Thereafter, the plaintiff constructed a community hall in the plaint schedule property complying the terms of Ext.A1 licence deed. According to the plaintiff, the licence created through Ext.A1 has become a permanent and irrevocable licence. The licence was granted for the purpose of setting up a community hall, library, reading room, park, tuition centre, nursery school and a clinic. By alleging that the plaintiff has ceased to occupy the scheduled property and has not made the constructions agreed to between the parties in Ext.A1 and has failed to start the library, reading room, park, clinic and nursery school, the defendant issued Ext.A2 notice dated 16.08.2010 directing the plaintiff to surrender vacant possession of the property to the defendant. Apprehending trespass and forcible eviction from the part of the defendant, the suit was filed.

6. The defendant contested the suit and contented that the plaintiff has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the licence whereby, paving way to the defendant to revoke the licence as per clause 7 in Ext.A1. It has been specifically contended that apart from making a temporary construction in the property styling it as a community hall, the plaintiff has failed to construct any library, reading room, clinic, park, tuition centre, and nursery school. On 22.04.2005, the Executive Committee of the GCDA had resolved to revoke the licence and to recover possession of the property from the plaintiff. Consequently, Ext.B5 proceedings dated 18.05.2005 based on Ext.B2, was passed by the Secretary of the GCDA, whereby revoking Ext.A1 licence granted to the plaintiff. The Town Planner was ordered to take possession of the land vide Ext.B5. Ext.B3 notice dated 21.10.2005 based on Ext.B5 order, was issued by the Secretary of the GCDA to the plaintiff, informing the plaintiff regarding the revocation of the licence and by calling upon the plaintiff to surrender vacant possession of the property. Pursuant to Ext.B3, the plaintiff issued Ext.B6 representation dated 09.11.2006 seeking permission to continue at the premises. According to the defendant, the plaintiff is not entitled to continue at the premises and to seek a decree of perpetual injunction as the one sought for.

7. This Court has admitted this Second Appeal on the following substantial questions of law:

"(1) Is not the appellant entitled to get the benefit of Section 60(b) of Indian Easements Act and if so, is not the appellant entitled to get a decre