I.G.E. INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. Larica Infrastructure Limited
Facts
The plaintiff, I.G.E. (India) Private Limited, a perpetual lessee of a portion of premises at 7, Red Cross Place, Kolkata, granted a Business Service Centre (BSC) to the defendant, Larica Infrastructure Limited. An agreement dated August 19, 2017, stipulated a 36-month term from June 1, 2017, to May 31, 2020, for the BSC. The defendant agreed to pay monthly charges and vacate the premises upon expiry. The defendant defaulted in payment of monthly charges from July 2018 and failed to vacate. The plaintiff initiated a suit (CS 18 of 2020) for possession, injunction, and recovery of dues. A part decree was passed on March 23, 2021, regarding eviction and occupation charges until September 30, 2021, with specific payment terms for arrears. However, the defendant only paid for June 2020, July 2020, March 2021, and April 2021, failing to pay further amounts.
Held
The Court held that the plaintiff has successfully proved the defendant's default in payment of occupational charges as per Clause 4.1 of the agreement. The Court calculated the arrears from July 1, 2018, to May 31, 2019, at Rs. 1,89,100/- per month, totaling Rs. 20,80,000/-, and from June 1, 2019, to May 31, 2020, at Rs. 2,04,230/- per month, totaling Rs. 24,50,760/-. The total arrears of occupational charges were found to be Rs. 45,30,860/-. The Court also found the plaintiff entitled to interest at 8% per annum on the arrears. Regarding the issue of failure to vacate, the Court noted that the defendant had not paid any further amounts after the part decree, indicating continued default. The suit was disposed of with a decree for the calculated arrears of occupational charges and interest.
Key Issues
1. Whether the plaintiff has proved the defendant's default in payment of occupational charges as per Clause 4.1 of the agreement dated August 19, 2017, and is entitled to recover the arrears? 2. Whether the plaintiff has proved that the defendant has failed to vacate the premises as per Clause 2.3 and 2.4 of the agreement, and is entitled to damages/per diem charges? Arguments for the Plaintiff: The plaintiff contended that the defendant failed to pay the agreed monthly charges from July 2018 onwards, amounting to a significant sum. They also argued that despite the expiry of the lease period and a part decree for eviction, the defendant continued to be in illegal occupation and failed to pay subsequent occupation charges. The plaintiff relied on the agreement dated August 19, 2017, and the evidence presented by their witness to prove the default and illegal occupation. Arguments for the Defendant: No specific arguments were recorded for the defendant in the judgment regarding the issues of default in payment or failure to vacate.
Sections Cited
Clause 2.1, Clause 2.2, Clause 2.3, Clause 2.4, Clause 4.1, Clause 4.5
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA (Ordinary Original Civil Juri iction) ORIGINAL SIDE
Present: The Hon’ble Justice Krishna Rao …for the plaintiff.
Heard on : 06.02.2023
Judgment on : 17.02.2023 Krishna Rao, J.: The plaintiff has filed the instant suit praying for possession of the suit property, permanent injunction and for payment of amount due and payable by the defendant.
The plaintiff is a perpetual lessee with respect of a portion of premises No. 7, Red Cross Place, Kolkata, inter alia, being the 4th Floor of the 2
premises comprising of 5300 sq. ft. carpet area. As per the request of defendant, the plaintiff granted a Business Service Centre (herein after referred to as “BSC”) with respect of the above mentioned premises to the defendant. The plaintiff had also allowed the defendant to use the area at the ground floor of the said premises No.
As the defendant had defaulted in handing over possession of the p
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.