Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute between Bengal Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Limited (a Government of India enterprise) as the owner of public premises and Ajit Nain as a lessee who continued in possession after the lease expired on 31 May 2014. The lease was for 21 years from 1 June 1993 for a three-storied building of 6500 sq ft and open space of 2575.13 sq ft at Maniktala Main Road, Kolkata, used for running a Montessori school. After the lease expired, the tenant did not vacate and stopped paying rent except for Rs 25,00,000 deposited pursuant to a High Court order. The Estate Officer, appointed after a previous round of litigation, issued a show cause notice and after several hearings passed an eviction order on 1 October 2018 under Section 5(1) and Section 7(2) and (2A) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971, assessing damages and interest at Rs 4,61,63,624. The tenant challenged this order before the Calcutta High Court in a pending appeal (MAT 586 of 2018), and the High Court set aside the eviction order and remitted the matter to the Estate Officer for fresh consideration. The owner appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court noted that the lease had expired and the tenant had not paid rent except the deposited amount. The Court held that the High Court's order of remand was justified to give the tenant sufficient opportunity, but as an interim measure, the tenant must pay damages for use and occupation: Rs 2,50,000 per month from June 2014 to May 2018 and Rs 3,00,000 per month from June 2018 onwards, with arrears to be paid in three installments. The Estate Officer was directed to determine the final quantum of damages after hearing both parties, and the amounts paid would be adjustable. The appeals were disposed of with these directions.
Headnote
A) Public Premises Act - Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants - Sections 5(1), 7(2) and 7(2A) - Lease expired by efflux of time - Tenant continuing in possession without payment of rent - Estate Officer passed eviction order and assessed damages - High Court set aside order and remitted matter - Supreme Court affirmed remand but directed tenant to pay interim damages at Rs.2,50,000 per month from June 2014 to May 2018 and Rs.3,00,000 per month from June 2018 onwards, adjustable against final determination - Held that sufficient opportunity must be given to tenant, but interim payment is necessary to protect interests of public sector undertaking (Paras 15-17).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the eviction order passed by the Estate Officer and remitting the matter for fresh consideration, and what interim directions should be given regarding payment of damages for use and occupation.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's order remitting the matter to the Estate Officer for fresh consideration. However, as an interim measure, the Court directed respondent No.1 (tenant) to pay damages for use and occupation at Rs 2,50,000 per month from June 2014 to May 2018 and Rs 3,00,000 per month from June 2018 onwards, with arrears (after deducting Rs 25,00,000 already deposited) to be paid in three equal installments by 31 August 2019, 31 October 2019, and 31 December 2019. The appellant was permitted to withdraw the deposited amount of Rs 25,00,000 and electricity charges. The Estate Officer was directed to determine the final quantum of damages after hearing both parties, and the interim payments would be adjustable.
Law Points
- Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act
- 1971
- Sections 4
- 5
- 7
- 9
- Lease renewal
- Damages for use and occupation
- Interim relief pending eviction proceedings
