0209wp3578 of 2020.odt

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

WRIT PETITION NO.3578/2020

Ms. Deepali D/o Vinod Agrawal

...Versus...

Vishal S/o Setwandas Khatri and others

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

Court'

s or Judge'

s orders

appearances, Court'

s orders or directions

and Registrar'

s orders

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -

Shri M.R. Joharapurkar, Advocate for petitioner

Shri R.K. Bachwani, Advocate for respondents

CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATE : 02/09/2021

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

The order passed below Exh.22, dated

20/02/2020, by the 2^nd Additional Judge, Small Causes

Court, Nagpur on an application under Order 15-A of the

Code of Civil Procedure for directing the defendant to

deposit the occupation charges, whereby the learned Court

while partly allowing the application, has directed the

respondents to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards

arrears of license fee from May, 2019 to February, 2020

@ Rs.10,000/- per month within 45 days and continue to

make payment of the license fee @ Rs.10,000/- per month

0209wp3578 of 2020.odt

2

from March, 2020 onwards on or before 15^th day of every

month till the suit is decided, is being challenged.

3.

Shri Joharapurkar, learned Counsel for the

petitioner submits that the order is unsustainable as

Clause -8 of the leave and license agreement provides that in

case the license is not continued, the licensee shall pay

damages @ Rs.2,000/- per day as well as the monthly license

fees, till the date of delivery of possession. He, therefore,

submits that the learned Court ought to have granted the

occupation charges in terms of what was provided in

Clause-8 of the agreement of leave and license dated

02/03/2016. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order

is liable to be set aside and the application granted in terms

of Clause-8 of the agreement of leave and license.

4.

Learned Counsel for the respondents points out

that while creating the leave and license an amount of

Rs.20,00,000/- was given as a refundable security deposit.

This amount at the instructions of the petitioner was given to

her father by virtue of four cheques of Rs.5,00,000/- each,

the receipt of which is not disputed. It is also not disputed

that the said cheques have been encashed and the sum of

Rs.20,00,000/- is with the father of the petitioner, at the

behest and directions of the petitioner. The agreement

further records that the said sum shall be refunded by the

0209wp3578 of 2020.odt

3

father of the licensor/petitioner at the time of expiration of

the leave and license agreement. The period of the license

was from 01/03/2016 to 28/02/2019. Learned Counsel

submits that before the expiry of the period of license by a

notice dated 28/2/2018, the respondents expressed their

intention of vacating the premises, upon the expiry of the

license and called upon the petitioner as well as her father to

clarify the situation by a reply within seven days from the

date of receipt of the notice whether the amount of security

deposit of Rs.20,00,000/- would be refunded to the

respondents at the time of expiration of term of license. To

this, a reply was given by the petitioner on 08/03/2018,

which is absolutely silent upon this aspect, however, the

same seeks delivery of vacant possession within 15 days of

the receipt of the said reply. It is, in these circumstances, that

the period of leave and license agreement having expired, a

suit for eviction came to be filed bearing Regular Civil Suit

No.154/2018 before the Small Causes Court, Nagpur. The

father of the petitioner, has b