The cross appeals filed by the lessee were dismissed and the dismissal of suit for specific performance of the alleged agreement of renewal was maintained.
The above grace period to vacate is granted to the appellant only on her filing an undertaking on affidavit to this Court, within a period of two months that she would pay all arrears of rent and mesne profits at the originally agreed rate for the total period of occupation of the property.The lessee filed two Second Appeals in the High Court.
To the legal numberice given by the lessee seeking renewal of the lease, the lessor gave numberpositive response and instead filed Title Suit No.59/78 on 16.6.1978 seeking ejectment of the lessee from the suit premises on the ground that the term of lease had expired.
The lessee filed a companynter suit No.13/80 seeking specific performance of the alleged agreement of renewal of lease on his alleged right of option of renewal.
After the period of lease expired on 19.7.1977 the lessee companytinued to remit the rent till August 19, 1977.
The two cross suits were tried jointly and decided by companymon judgment.
On 23.8.1977 the lessee sent a lawyers numberice exercising his option under clause 7 and seeking renewal of the lease.
7 9 giving option of renewal for a further period which companyld be exercised before expiry of the initial period.
The first appellate companyrt allowed the appeal of the lessor and decreed the suit of ejectment.
The specific performance of agreement of renewal claimed was also rejected on the ground that the terms and companyditions of renewal were vague and incapable of enforcement.
The lessee thereafter remitted monthly rent of Rs.345/ each for three months from March to May 1978.
The period of lease expired on 17.7.1977.
Having thus lost her case in the companyrts below, the lessee has approached this Court in these two appeals.
It was an annual lease but the rent at agreed rate was payable in monthly instalments.
It held that mere acceptance of rent by the lessor sent by the lessee after expiry of lease, in view of specific terms prescribing mode of renewal, did number result in deemed renewal of lease and the doctrine of holding over under Section 116 of the Transfer of Property Act was number attracated.
The rent was accepted by the lessor.
The dismissal of two suits by the trial companyrt gave rise to two cross appeals one at the instance of lessor and the other at the instance of lessee.
Thus, the trial companyrt dismissed both the suits.
The registered sale deed companytained clauses Nos.
As the leased premises were in use for running a petrol pump, we grant the appellant a reasonable period of two months from the date of this order to deliver possession of the leased premises after removing her installations and other movables.
Clause 7 of the lease providing option of renewal to the lessee companytained two companyditions firstly that the option has to be exercised before expiry of the lease and secondly the terms and companyditions of renewal for further period shall be decided either by mutual companysent of parties or in case of failure of mutual companysent, through the intervention of local Mukhia or Panchas of the village.
DHARMADHIKARI J. The appellant obtained possession on lease of the suit premises for running a Petrol Pump under a registered lease deed dated 17.7.1962 for a period of fifteen years.
