Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 11406
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR, J
Sri Satyanarayana Lahoti – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.31174 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners:learned counsel for the petitioners
For the Respondents:learned standing counsel for respondent No.1, Sri Dominic Fernandes
A lease ceases to exist upon expiration if not renewed, entitling the lessor to reclaim possession.
Headnote:(A) Writ Jurisdiction - Petition seeking to declare the action of the respondent in not vacating a retail outlet lease as illegal and arbitrary.
(B) The Lease expired on 05.08.2023, and the respondent refused to vacate despite termination.
(C) Relevant facts include letters exchanged regarding lease renewal and petitions filed in lower courts for specific performance of said renewal.
(D) Court finds precedent in similar circumstances resulting in possession restoration to petitioners within a specified timeframe. (E) Findings emphasize lawful possession rights post-expiration. (F)
Result: Writ Petition allowed directing the respondent to vacate within three months.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court directed respondent to vacate property. (Para 1) |
| 2. lease expired, petitioners reclaiming property. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. court referenced precedent for similar cases. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. final ruling reaffirming petitioners' rights. (Para 8) |
| 5. writ petition concluded with no costs awarded. (Para 9) |
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri.Dominic Fernandes, learned standing counsel for IOCL appearing for respondent No.2. With their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal.
2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:-
“to declare the action of the Respondent No 2 in not vacating the Retail Outlet site over the land admeasuring 1333.33 Sq.Yds in Sy No.286/e, situated at Karimnagar revenue village, situated at Kaman Road, Karimnagar Town and District as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to vacate the site and deliver the possession to the petitioner.”
3. Brief facts stated in this writ petition are that the petitioners claim to be the owners and possessors of property admeasuring 1333.33 Sq.Yds, in Sy.No.286/e, situated at Karimnagar Revenue Village, Kaman Road, Karimnagar Town and District. The case of the petitioners is that the respondent No.2, for establishing and running a retail out-let in the name of M/s.Mahendra Filing Station, has taken the subject property on lease for a period of 20 years and the same was registered vide lease deed bearing document No.10026 of 2004 dated 15.09.2004. Later, respondent No.2 vide letter dated 08.02.2023, requested petitioners to renew the said lease for a further period of 19 years 11 months and the petitioners vide letter dated 28.02.2023, stated that they are not interested in renewing the lease dated 15.09.2004 and requested respondent No.2 to vacate the subject premises.
Thereafter, respondent No.2 issued letter dated 24.08.2023 and again requested the petitioners to renew the lease and in reply the petitioners on 09.09.2023 issued a letter and requested respondent No.2 to vacate the subject premises. Further case of the petitioners when the respondent No.2 filed O.S.No.722 of 2023 on the file of learned III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagr, for specific performance of the renewal clause of the lease, the petitioners issued legal notice dated 12.01.2024 and informed respondent No.2 that the lease deed dated 15.09.2004 has been terminated by efflux of time and called upon the respondent No.2 to vacate the premises within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of notice. However, respondent No.2 alleging it to be statutory tenant, refused to vacate the subject premises.
Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the lease dated 15.09.2004, was for a period of 20 years and the same was expired on 05.08.2023 and in view of the non renewal of the lease, the respondent No.2 ought to have vacated the subject premises and instead of doing the same, respondent No.2 is refusing to vacate the subject premises and is in unlawful possession of the subject property. It is further submitted that the petitioners are intending to distribute the subject property to their children and are not interested in renewing the lease at any cost.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that in similar circumstances this Court in W.P.Nos.25779 and 18813 of 2024 dated 13.11.2024, has passed the following order:
“23.W.P.Nos.25779 and 18813 of 2024 are allowed and disposed of by directing the respondents to vacate the subject premises and hand over possession of the subject premises to the petitioners within 4 weeks from 18.11.2024.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further prayed this Court to pass similar order as passed in W.P.Nos.25779 and 18813 of 2024 dated 13.11.2024 and pray this Court to direct the respondent No.2 to vacate the subject premises in a time bound period.
7.
