Bombay High Court Dismisses HPCL's Revision Against Eviction Decree in Lease Renewal Dispute. HPCL's Claim of Statutory Right to Renew Lease Under Section 7(3) of Caltex Act Rejected as Lease Was Not Renewed Before Expiry of Original Term.

High Court: Bombay High Court In Favour of Prosecution
  • 573
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves a dispute between Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL), the revision applicant, and the legal heirs of Mansukhlal Doshi, the respondents, over possession of a plot of land in Mumbai. The original owner, Mansukhlal Doshi, executed a lease deed dated 31 January 1964 in favor of Caltex (India) Limited for a period of 20 years from 1 December 1963, with an option for renewal for a further 10 years. Caltex was later nationalized, and its rights vested in HPCL under the Caltex (Acquisition of Shares of Caltex Oil Refining (India) Limited and of the Undertakings in India of Caltex (India) Limited) Act, 1977 (Caltex Act). The original lease expired on 30 November 1983, and HPCL continued in possession, possibly under an extension. On 23 July 1993, HPCL wrote to the plaintiffs' mother seeking renewal for 10 years from 30 November 1993. The plaintiffs served a notice on 29 July 2003 seeking possession after expiry of the extended term on 30 November 2003. HPCL claimed a statutory right under Section 7(3) of the Caltex Act to renew the lease for a further 10 years from 1 December 2003. The plaintiffs denied this and filed a suit for possession and mesne profits in the Small Causes Court, Mumbai. The trial court decreed the suit on 7 June 2018, directing HPCL to hand over possession and ordering an enquiry into mesne profits under Order 20 Rule 12 CPC. HPCL appealed, and the appellate bench dismissed the appeal on 18 September 2023. HPCL then filed a civil revision application in the Bombay High Court. The High Court considered the distinction between extension and renewal of lease, and held that HPCL's claim of a statutory right to renewal under Section 7(3) of the Caltex Act was not valid because the lease had not been renewed before the expiry of the original term. The court noted that HPCL's letter of 23 July 1993 sought renewal for 10 years from 30 November 1993, but no renewal deed was executed, and HPCL continued as a tenant holding over. The subsequent claim in 2003 for renewal was not permissible as the lease had already expired. The High Court dismissed the revision application, confirming the eviction decree and the direction for mesne profits.

Headnote

A) Lease Law - Renewal vs Extension - Distinction between extension and renewal of lease - Extension continues the same contract for a specified period, while renewal creates a new contract - HPCL's claim of renewal under Section 7(3) of Caltex Act failed as the lease was not renewed before expiry of original term (Paras 8-10).

B) Statutory Interpretation - Section 7(3) of Caltex (Acquisition of Shares of Caltex Oil Refining (India) Limited and of the Undertakings in India of Caltex (India) Limited) Act, 1977 - Right to renewal - The statutory right to renewal under Section 7(3) must be exercised before the expiry of the lease term; HPCL's letter dated 23 July 1993 sought renewal for 10 years from 30 November 1993, but the lease was not renewed, and HPCL continued as tenant holding over - Subsequent claim for renewal in 2003 was not valid as the lease had already expired (Paras 5-7).

C) Civil Procedure - Mesne Profits - Order 20 Rule 12 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Enquiry into mesne profits directed by trial court and confirmed by appellate court - HPCL directed to pay mesne profits at Rs.3,00,000 per month from date of decree (Para 6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether HPCL had a valid statutory right under Section 7(3) of the Caltex Act to renew the lease for a further period of 10 years after the expiry of the extended term on 30 November 2003, and whether the eviction decree passed by the courts below was sustainable.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the Civil Revision Application, confirming the eviction decree passed by the Small Causes Court and the Appellate Bench. The court held that HPCL's claim of a statutory right to renewal under Section 7(3) of the Caltex Act was not valid as the lease was not renewed before the expiry of the original term. The direction for mesne profits was also confirmed.

Law Points

  • Lease renewal
  • extension vs renewal
  • statutory right to renewal
  • Caltex Act 1977
  • Section 7(3)
  • notice of termination
  • mesne profits
  • Order 20 Rule 12 CPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (BOM) (11) 192

Civil Revision Application No.602 of 2024

2024-11-19

Sandeep V. Marne

2024:BHC-AS:45043

Mr. Pralhad Paranjape with Mr. Manish Kelkar for Revision Applicant; Mr. Rohan Cama with Mr. Anish Karande, Mr. Shahrukh Shaikh i/b Mr. Rohit Shetty for Respondents

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited

Mr. Anil Mansukhlal Doshi, Mr. Dinesh Mansukhlal Doshi, Mr. Himanshu Mansukhlal Doshi (legal heirs of Mr. Mansukhlal Doshi)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil revision application challenging eviction decree passed by appellate bench of Small Causes Court in a suit for possession and mesne profits.

Remedy Sought

HPCL sought to set aside the judgment and decree dated 18 September 2023 passed by the Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court dismissing Appeal No.269 of 2018 and confirming the eviction decree dated 7 July 2018 passed by Small Causes Court, Mumbai.

Filing Reason

HPCL claimed a statutory right under Section 7(3) of the Caltex Act to renew the lease for a further period of 10 years from 1 December 2003, which was denied by the plaintiffs/respondents.

Previous Decisions

The Small Causes Court decreed the suit on 7 June 2018 directing HPCL to hand over possession and ordered enquiry into mesne profits. The Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court dismissed HPCL's appeal on 18 September 2023.

Issues

Whether HPCL had a valid statutory right under Section 7(3) of the Caltex Act to renew the lease for a further period of 10 years after the expiry of the extended term on 30 November 2003. Whether the eviction decree passed by the courts below was sustainable.

Submissions/Arguments

Mr. Paranjape for HPCL argued that the original lease was for 20 years with a right to extension by 10 years each, and that HPCL had both contractual and statutory right to seek extension and renewal. He distinguished between 'extension' and 'renewal', submitting that what was done from 1983 to 2003 was an extension, and what was sought in 2003 was a renewal under Section 7(3) of the Caltex Act. Mr. Cama for the respondents argued that HPCL's claim of renewal was not valid as the lease had expired and no renewal deed was executed.

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory right to renewal under Section 7(3) of the Caltex Act must be exercised before the expiry of the lease term. HPCL's letter dated 23 July 1993 sought renewal for 10 years from 30 November 1993, but no renewal deed was executed, and HPCL continued as a tenant holding over. The subsequent claim in 2003 for renewal was not permissible as the lease had already expired. Therefore, the eviction decree was valid.

Judgment Excerpts

At the outset Mr. Paranjape, the learned counsel appearing for Revision Applicant seeks leave to convert Writ Petition into Civil Revision Application. Leave granted. The Small Causes Court has decreed the TE Suit No.181/224 of 2011 and has directed the Revision Applicant to handover vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises to the Plaintiffs with further direction for conduct of enquiry into mesne profits under Order 20, Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Procedural History

The original owner Mansukhlal Doshi executed a lease deed dated 31 January 1964 in favor of Caltex for 20 years from 1 December 1963. Caltex was nationalized and its rights vested in HPCL. The lease expired on 30 November 1983. HPCL continued in possession. On 23 July 1993, HPCL sought renewal for 10 years from 30 November 1993. Plaintiffs served notice on 29 July 2003 seeking possession after expiry of extended term on 30 November 2003. HPCL claimed renewal under Section 7(3) of Caltex Act. Plaintiffs filed TE Suit No.181/224 of 2011 in Small Causes Court, Mumbai. Trial court decreed suit on 7 June 2018. HPCL filed Appeal No.269 of 2018, which was dismissed on 18 September 2023. HPCL filed Civil Revision Application No.602 of 2024 in Bombay High Court, which was dismissed on 19 November 2024.

Acts & Sections

  • Caltex (Acquisition of Shares of Caltex Oil Refining (India) Limited and of the Undertakings in India of Caltex (India) Limited) Act, 1977: Section 7(3)
  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 20 Rule 12
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Termination of Workmen Without Compliance with Section 25-F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Termination of 18 workmen by M/s. Lumax Auto Technologies Ltd. held illegal for non-compliance with manda...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Tribunal Order Allowing Correction of Date of Birth at Fag End of Service — State of Maharashtra v. Sudhir Bhagwat Kalekar. The court held that an application for correction of date of birth made after 30 years of service,...