Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals by GIDC and Industrial Association Against Order Restraining Demolition of Structures in Industrial Estate. Court Holds That Lessee's Right to Enjoy Property Includes Right to Make Constructions Subject to Lease Terms and That Demolition Without Notice Violates Principles of Natural Justice.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: GOA In Favour of Accused
  • 108
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves two appeals filed by the Goa Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) and the Corlim Industrial Estate Industries Association against an order of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, granting temporary injunction in favor of M/s. Sadhana Builders Pvt. Ltd. The respondent had taken a plot on lease from GIDC for a period of 30 years. The respondent constructed a building on the plot. After the lease expired, GIDC and the association sought to demolish the structures. The respondent filed a suit for injunction. The trial court granted temporary injunction restraining the appellants from demolishing the structures. The High Court upheld the injunction, holding that the lessee had a right to enjoy the property and make constructions, and that demolition without notice violated natural justice. The appeals were dismissed.

Headnote

A) Property Law - Lease - Right to Construct - The lessee's right to enjoy the leased property includes the right to make constructions, subject to the terms of the lease deed. The court held that the lease deed did not prohibit the lessee from making constructions, and therefore, the lessee had a right to maintain the suit for injunction against demolition. (Paras 10-15)

B) Civil Procedure - Injunction - Prima Facie Case - The court held that the respondent had made out a prima facie case for grant of injunction as the appellants sought to demolish the structures without giving any notice or following due process of law. The balance of convenience was in favor of the respondent. (Paras 16-20)

C) Natural Justice - Right to Hearing - Demolition of structures without notice violates principles of natural justice. The court held that even if the lease had expired, the lessee was entitled to a hearing before being dispossessed. (Paras 21-25)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellants were entitled to demolish the structures of the respondent without following due process of law and whether the respondent had a right to maintain the suit for injunction.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Both appeals are dismissed. The order of the trial court granting temporary injunction is upheld.

Law Points

  • Right to enjoy property includes right to make constructions subject to lease terms
  • Demolition without notice violates principles of natural justice
  • Lease deed terms must be strictly construed
  • Injunction can be granted to protect possession even if lease has expired
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (01) 172

Appeal from Order Nos. 5 and 25 of 2014

0000-00-00

F. M. Reis

2014:BHC-GOA:2121

Mr. A. D. Bhobe, Mr. N. Sardessai, Mr. Shirin Naik, Mr. V. Rodrigues, Mr. A. Prabhudesai

Goa Industrial Development Corporation and Corlim Industrial Estate Industries Association

M/s. Sadhana Builders Pvt. Ltd., State of Goa, and Corlim Industrial Estate Industrial Association

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

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeals against order granting temporary injunction restraining demolition of structures.

Remedy Sought

The appellants sought to set aside the order of temporary injunction granted by the trial court.

Filing Reason

The appellants wanted to demolish structures on leased property after expiry of lease.

Previous Decisions

The trial court granted temporary injunction in favor of the respondent.

Issues

Whether the respondent had a right to maintain the suit for injunction. Whether the appellants could demolish structures without notice.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the lease had expired and the respondent had no right to remain in possession. Respondent argued that they had constructed the building with permission and were entitled to protection.

Ratio Decidendi

A lessee has a right to enjoy the leased property including making constructions, and demolition without notice violates principles of natural justice. The lessee is entitled to an injunction to protect possession even after expiry of lease if no due process is followed.

Judgment Excerpts

The lessee's right to enjoy the property includes the right to make constructions. Demolition without notice violates principles of natural justice.

Procedural History

The trial court granted temporary injunction. The appellants filed appeals before the High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 39 Rules 1 and 2
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Landlord's Petition in Tenancy Dispute — Purchase Declared Ineffective Due to Tenant's Default in Payment of Instalments. MRT's Condonation of Delay Without Proper Opportunity to Oppose Set Aside.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Habeas Corpus Petition Challenging Preventive Detention Under MISA. Undisclosed History Sheet Material Held to Be 'Other Particulars' Under Section 3(3), Not Required to Be Communicated to Detenu Under Article 22(5).