During the pendency of the appeal against the decree passed by S. P. Mitra, J., the landlord transferred the premises to Messrs Calcutta Credit Corporation Ltd. The landlord and the trans feree will companylectively be, referred to hereinafter as the landlords.
Allen Berry addressed a letter to the landlord on September 14, 1.953, intimating that they were holding over the premises on the expiry of the lease according to the provisions of the Rent Control Act.
65 of 1959, P. Das, M. G. Poddar and V. N. Poddar, for the appellants.
On February IO, 1954, the landlord called upon Allen Berry to vacate and deliver possession of the premises, on the expiry of March 31, 1954.
The suit was resisted by the respondent principally on two grounds i that the tenancy of Allen Berry was number determined before the sub letting in their favour Lind ii that even if it be held that the tenancy of Allen Berry was determined before May 7, 1954, by virtue of the provisions of the West Bengal.
By letter dated August 28, 1953, attorney of the landlord informed Allen Berry that the earlier, numberice, dated August 12, 1953, companyld number be withdrawn except by mutual companysent, and since the landlord had a reed to lease the premises to Messrs. lop Rubber Co. India Ltd. with effect from September, 1953, the landlord was unable to give his companysent to such withdrawal, and that it would insist upon Allen Berry vacatin the premises as already intimated.
71 of 1965, Appeal from the judgment and decree dated February 1, 1962, of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal No.
495/ per month from March 1, 1955 till delivery of possession.
The landlord then instituted a suit against Allen Berry claiming a decree in ejectment in respect of the demised premises ,Ind for mesne profits and other reliefs.
The landlord did number agree to the withdrawal of the numberice dated August 12, 1953, and insisted that possession of the demised pre mises be delivered.
P. Mitra, J., decreed the claim of the landlord for possession of the premises in the occupation of the respondent and for mesne profits at the rate of Rs.
N. Sinha and S. N. Mukherjee for the respondents.
This suit was settled on March 28, 1955 and a companysent decree was passed.
and requested the landlord to arrange to take delivery of possession.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Allen Berry served a numberice in writin , upon the landlord intimating their intention to vacate the premises oil August 31, .1953, at 3 30 P.m.
Allen Berry informed the landlord that they did number intented to vtcate the premises on August 31, 1953, as originilly intimated or at all, and that the numberice dated August 12 , 1953, be treated as cancelled.
The landlord then sued Messrs Happy Homes P hereinafter called the respondent in the High Court of Calcutta for a decree for possession of the premises in its occupation and for mesne profits.
Under the terms of the lease sub letting or parting with the possession of the deiiiised premises or any part thereof by the tenants without the previous companysent in writing of the landlord was expressly prohibited.
13y letter dated August 1953.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. A building in the town of Calcutta belonging to the the Chitpore Golabari Company Private Ltd. was let out undeia Written lease for a period of twelve years companymencing from January 1, 1939, to Messrs Allen Berry Co. Ltd. liereinafteicalled Allen Berry.
On August 12, 1953.
After the vxpiry of the period Allen Berry companytinued to hold over the premises.
Rent Control Temporary Provisions Act, 1950, the respondent became a direct tenant of the landlord and was entitled to the benefits of that Act.
to Happy Homes P Ltd. respondent in this appeal.
By their numberice dated August 12, 1953, they intimated their intention to vacate the premises on August 31, 1953, at 3.30 P.M. They thereafter withdrew this intimation by letter dated August 25, 1953.
Allen Berry failed to carry out the requisition, and on May 7, 1954, they sub let a part of the ground floor measuring approximately 2100 sq.
A Division Bench of the, High Court reversed the decree passed by S. P. Mitra, J., and ordered that the claim of the landlords be dismissed.
