Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Assignment of tenancy in Vaz Forwarding Limited vs State Bank Of India And Others on 3 January, 1994Matching Fragments
1. The petitioners are the owners of the office premises bearing No. 4, Atlanta Building, Nariman Point, Bombay-400 021. The petitioners are praying that the respondents be ordered and directed to forthwith hand over quiet, vacant and peaceful possession of the office premises to the petitioners and that the respondents be ordered and directed to pay to the petitioners a sum of Rs. 20,000 per day as mesne profits from November 24, 1991, till the date of handing over the possession of the said premises along with interest and, lastly, that the respondents be restrained by an order of permanent injunction from selling, assigning, transferring the tenancy rights in the said premises or parting with possession thereof or induction any third party therein.
4. Mr. Doctor, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the lease having been terminated, the lessee had thus become a statutory tenant and the tenancy rights cannot be assigned in view of the provisions of section 15 of the Rent Act. However, on behalf of the respondents it was submitted, firstly, that the lease has not been validly terminated and, therefore, the contractual tenancy was still subsisting and under the terms of the lease in question the lessee had power to assign. It was further submitted that assuming the termination of lease was valid in law there was no distinction between contractual and statutory tenancies, their incidence being same, and, therefore, even as a statutory tenant leasehold rights can be assigned and the prohibition contained in section 15 of the Rent Act against, inter alia, assignments would not be applicable as there is a contract to the contrary, viz., a covenant authorising lessee to assign.