Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Concrete Developers, a partnership firm, filed a suit for ejectment, possession, damages, and mesne profits against the respondent, Central Bank of India, based on a registered indenture of lease dated 22.07.2005 for a period of five years from 01.08.2005 to 31.07.2010, with an option to renew for two further periods of five years each. The petitioner alleged that upon expiry of the first term, the respondents proposed a fresh lease but did not agree to a 20% rent increase, and despite negotiations, no fresh lease was executed. The respondents continued in possession, and the petitioner issued a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 on 27.09.2014, terminating the tenancy effective 31.10.2014. The suit was filed on 12.01.2015. During the suit, the petitioner moved an application under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC for a decree on admission, claiming that the respondents had admitted the lease deed and the notice under Section 106 in their written statement. The trial court rejected the application on 06.08.2021, leading to the present writ petition. The High Court examined the written statement and found that the respondents had not made clear and unequivocal admissions. They had pleaded that the lease was renewed for a further period of five years and that the notice under Section 106 was not valid. The court held that Order 12 Rule 6 CPC requires an admission that is unambiguous and unconditional, and since there were disputed questions of fact regarding renewal and termination, the trial court was justified in rejecting the application. The writ petition was dismissed, and the trial court was directed to expedite the suit.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Decree on Admission - Order 12 Rule 6 CPC - Admission must be clear, unambiguous, and unconditional - The court held that the alleged admissions in the written statement regarding the lease deed and notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 were not unequivocal as the respondents disputed the renewal and termination of tenancy - Held that the trial court correctly rejected the application as there were triable issues (Paras 6-10). B) Property Law - Lease Renewal - Section 106 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Termination of tenancy - The court noted that the respondents claimed a renewal of lease for a further period of five years and disputed the validity of the notice under Section 106 - Held that such disputed facts cannot be decided in a summary manner under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC (Paras 7-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the application under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC for decree on admission when the respondents allegedly admitted the lease and its termination.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the trial court's order rejecting the application under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC. The court directed the trial court to expedite the suit and dispose it of within one year from the date of the order.
Law Points
- Order 12 Rule 6 CPC
- decree on admission
- admission must be unequivocal
- lease renewal
- Section 106 Transfer of Property Act
- 1882
- tenancy at will
- disputed facts
