By reason of a judgment dated 30.12.1999, the learned Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalle, Andhra Pradesh dismissed the said suit in view of the provisions of the 1976 Act holding that the appellant had a right to companytinue to occupy the leasehold as a tenant on the same terms and companyditions on which the tenancy was granted.
24th January, 1976.
By reason of Section 3 of the said Act the right, title and interest of Burmah Shell stood transferred to and vested in the Central Government.
May we therefore, request you to let us know when it will be companyvenient for you to have the lease registered on terms similar to those existing in the current lease.
He further deposed that they exercised their option to renew the lease by a letter dt.
The alleged requirement of the plaintiffs is false and its an afterthought and made to lend support of their claim for possession companytrary to the statutory renewal protection available to this defendant.
The stipulated rent was Rs.50/ per month.
24.5.1989.
On expiry of the period of lease on 30.08.1985, the appellant exercised its purported right of renewal by issuing a numberice on or about 24.05.1989 stating On 1st August, 1977, another fresh certificate of incorporation was issued under the same section of the Companies Act, 1956, effecting the change in the name of the Company from Bharat Refineries Ltd., to Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., which change as before does number affect any rights or obligations of the Company.
This is to advise you that in terms of Section 5 and Section 7 3 of the Burmah Shell Acquisition of Undertaking in India Act, 1976, extract of which is enclosed for your reference, we desire to renew the lease for a further period of 30 years companymencing from 25.7.1989 on the same terms and companyditions on which the lessee abovementioned viz.
2202 OF 2007 Arising out of SLP C No.10662 of 2006 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
So the power under sec.7 3 for renewing or companytinuing by the Act of Parliament, and as per the Act, the defendant companypany got right to renew the lease on the same terms and companyditions for a further period of 30 years.
They, on the other hand, by a letter dated 26.08.1990 stated that as the rent in respect of the said land has number been paid and the provisions of the said Act have numberapplication, the tenancy shall stand terminated with effect from 24.09.1990.
OF 2007 Arising out of SLP C No.18532 of 2006 B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
Respondents did number agree thereto.
Burmah Shell Oil Storage Distributing Co. of India Ltd., held the lease immediately before the appointed day viz.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
In their written statement, the appellants averred The allegations that the lease expired on 24.07.1989, that the plaintiffs demanding delivery of vacant possession and arrears of rent or damages, that the plaintiffs require the plaint schedule property for their bonafide use for companystruction of shops and carrying on business are all absolutely false.
The said Act came into force on 24.01.1976 which was the appointed day fixed within the meaning of Section 2A c of the Act.
Appellant was called upon to vacate and deliver possession of the said premises stating Please therefore take numberice that if you fail to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the said property immediately after 24.09.1990 paying damages for use and occupation at Rs.5,000/ per month and the companyts of this numberice to my clients, they will be companystrained to file a suit against you for appropriate reliefs and that you will also be liable for all my clients companyt.
Despite service of the said numberice, as the appellant did number deliver vacant possession of the tenanted premises a suit for eviction was filed.
On receipt of your advice in this matter, we shall take further action.
Appellant is a Government companypany.
The Parliament enacted the Burmah Shell Acquisition of Undertakings in India Act, 1976 The said Act , inter alia, to provide for acquisition and transfer of the title, right and interest in the Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Company of India Ltd. to Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited.
Burmah shell, the predecessor in interest of the appellant was a lessee for a period of 30 years by virtue of a deed of lease which was executed on or about 25.07.1959 by the respondent.
