High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
S. P. Bhargava and A. P. Sen, JJ.
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH - Appellant
Versus
KHAN BAHADUR H.H.D.H.BHIWANDIWALA - Respondents
First Appeal 72 Of 1967
Decided On : 07/30/1970
Where the Contention is not that the suit should be dismissed because the plaintiff had not asked for further relief within the meaning of section 42, but that no suit of the present kind was maintainable, and the question was purely a question of law, it may be allowed to he raised for the first time in appeal. AIR 1960 SC 335 distinguished. [Para 7]
(2) Specific Relief Act, 1877 - S. 42 - section not exhaustive-mere declaration-when may be granted-power discretionary-when may be exercised.
The power of the Courts to make mere declaratory decree is not entirely governed by section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, as that section is not exhaustive of the cases in which a declaratory decree may be made, the Courts have power to grant such a decree independently of the section. AIR 1967 SC 436 relied on. [Para 9]
The requisites for a declaratory suit are well-known. In order to obtain relief of this kind, the plaintiff must establish that (i) the plaintiff is at the time of the suit entitled to any legal character or any right to any property; (ii) the defendant has denied or is interested in denying the character or the title of the plaintiff'; (iii) the declaration asked for is a declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to a legal character or to a right to property, and (iv) the plaintiff is not in a position to claim a further relief than a bare declaration of his title. Even if all these conditions are fulfilled, the Court has still a discretion to grant or not to grant a declaratory relief depending on the circumstances of each case. 31 MPLC 169 & 32 MPLC 237 referred to. [Para 10]
There can be no cause of action for a declaration in respect of pecuniary liability, arising from contract or otherwise, for, section 42 of the Specific Relief Act is limited to status and rights in property.
No party can claim a declaration as a matter of right. The grant of a declaratory relief is in the discretion of the Court and the discretion must be exercised according to sound legal principles. [Para 11]
( 1 ) THIS appeal, filed by the defendant, is directed against a judgment and decree of the Third Additional District Judge, Bhopal, dated 29th November 1966, decreeing the plaintiff's suit for declaration simpliciter.
( 2 ) THE material facts, shortly stated, are these. The dispute relates to rent of the distillery buildings including office and residential quarters at Jahangirabad, bhopal. On 26th March 1958, the plaintiff was granted a distillery contract for the wholesale supply of country spirit for the districts of Raisen and Sehore on the terms and conditions contained in the licence. It was permitted to occupy the distillery building for the manufacture of country liquor in terms of clauses 8 and 46 of the licence. The licence was in renewal of distillery contracts which the plaintiff had from the erstwhile Bhopal State right from the year 1916 onwards. For all these years, the then Government allowed the plaintiff to occupy the distillery building for execution of its excise contracts on payment of rent. The rent initially charged was Rs. 250/- per month and was finally enhanced to Rs. 392. 62 with certain additions and alterations to the building. When the distillery contract was granted to the plaintiff by the State of Madhya Pradesh, the pre-existing rent of Rupees 392. 62 was not adopted to be the basis for occupation of the distillery building. The renewal of the licence was subject to the condition that the plaintiff would be liable to pay such rent as was fixed by the Public Works Department under Fundamental Rule 45-B. Admittedly, there has so far been no final fixation of rent by that department.
( 3 ) CLAUSE 8 of the licence provided that if warehouse building was supplied by the state Government the plaintiff shall be liable to pay such rent as was fixed by the public Works Department. Clause 46 envisaged that it shall take on lease the distillery building on such conditions as regards rent etc. as shall be determined by that department. The relevant clauses read as follows:-
"8. The warehouse building shall be arranged by the licensee himself under the directions from the Excise Department. If warehouse building is supplied by the State Government the licensee shall be bound to pay necessary rent of the building or buildings on the terms and conditions offered by the Public Works Department of the State. "
XX XX XX XX"46. The licensee shall take on lease the distillery buildings and all other buildings and structures, etc. , attached thereto at Bhopal on such conditions as regards term, rent and otherwise as may be prescribed by the Public Works Department of the State Government. It shall be a condition of the lease that it shall terminate on the termination of this licence. "
The fixation of rent had to be in accordance with Fundamental Rule 45-B which reads:-" (i) The capital cost of all old buildings whose cost of construction or acquisition is not known shall be determined on plinth area basis at present day rates namely Rs. 10 per SQ. ft. of class I, Rs. 8 per sq. ft. of class II and Rs- 6 per sq. ft. of class III buildings and the value so assessed written down by 60 per cent (sixty per cent) on account of depreciation as the buildings are very old and lack amenities provided in modern constructions. "
( 4 ) ON 1st January 1959, the Public Works Department informed the plaintiff that it had fixed provisional rent of the building at Rs. 2071-81 per month, inclusive of taxes, which was payable w. e. f. 1st April 1958 and asked the plaintiff to execute a draft lease as furnished, embodying the terms and conditions of the lease as envisaged by clause 46 of the licence and also to pay Rs. 40,300-56, being the difference between the provisional rent and the existing rent. Along with the letter of demand, the department sent to the plaintiff a statement showing the manner in which the provisional rent had been fixed. The plaintiff did not comply with the demand for payment of provisional rent, no
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.