VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Gauhati High Court 2024 › High Court of Gauhati

Amar Gupta v. The Union of India and 5 Ors

Disposed Of
Court
High Court of Gauhati
Decided
21 July 2024
Bench
Michael Zothankhumaauthor
Case no.
WP(C) 5589/2023

Judgment

ORDER

22.07.2024 Heard Mr. D. Kakoti, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. A.K. Sahewalla, learned counsel appearing for the respondent SBI.

¶2The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent State Bank of India (SBI) have started operation of the SBI Madgharia Branch from the commercial space owned by the petitioner, which is in a building complex known as Shakti Square.

¶3Mr. Kakoti, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the respondent SBI having put their lockers in the leased out area since March 2021, no rent has been paid to the petitioner and neither has any agreement been executed between the parties for the leased space in terms of the letter dated 04.04.2020, issued by the Assistant General Manager, SBI (Annexure-4). Further, the respondent SBI have also not given to the petitioner, the interest free rental deposit equivalent to maximum 6 months' rent at the time of taking possession of the premises, as provided in clause 1.16 of the terms and conditions of the NIT No.SBIIMS/GHY/2019-20/83 (Annexure-3).

¶4Mr. Sahewalla, learned counsel for the respondent SBI, on the other hand, submits that rent has not been paid to the petitioner and an agreement was also not signed, due to the respondents not being given adequate water supply and all other amenities that were required to be given to the respondents. He also submits that the interest free rental deposit equivalent to 6 months' rent has also not been given to the petitioner till date. The learned counsel for the respondent SBI also submits that the petitioner's premises has been occupied by the respondent SBI only from 01.11.2021.

¶5I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and the pleadings in the records, clearly shows that the respondent SBI have not paid rent to the petitioner from the date it has occupied the Page No.# 4/5 petitioner's premises in question. Further, no agreement has been executed by the respondent SBI with the petitioner for the leased out property. Besides, the respondent SBI have not given interest free rental deposit equivalent to maximum of 6 months' rent to the petitioner, after taking possession of the premises in question.

¶6Though the respondent SBI counsel has tried to make out a case that due to the respondents not being given the basic facilities required for the premises, which has been communicated to the petitioner, as the reason for not giving the rent, this Court is of the view that the same cannot be said to be a justifiable reason for denial of payment of rent to the petitioner. When the respondent SBI has been occupying the petitioner's premises for the last few years, the reason for not paying rent by the respondent SBI is clearly unreasonable and not sustainable in law. The only question that has to be determined is the date from which the respondent SBI had occupied the petitioner's premises. While the respondent SBI have taken the stand that it has occupied the petitioner's premises from

01.11.2021, it is the case of the petitioner that the respondent SBI has started operating the SBI lockers in the petitioner's premises from March 2021 and that the petitioner had asked for payment of rent from April 2021, in terms of the letter dated 18.10.2021, issued by the petitioner (Annexure-13).

¶7The question as to whether the respondent SBI would have to pay rent to the petitioner from April 2021, being a disputed question of fact, this Court is of the view that the parties would have to approach the Civil Court for determining whether the petitioner is entitled to receive rent for the premises from the respondent SBI from April 2021. On the other hand, as the respondent SBI have admitted to having started operation of the Madgharia Branch of the SBI from 01.11.2021, the respondent SBI is directed to pay the agreed rent to the petitioner, @ ` 27.50 per sq. meter, w.e.f. 01.11.2021, within a period of 3(three) weeks from today. Further, as the respondent SBI has been unreasonable in not providing rent to the petitioner, despite being in occupation of the petitioner's premises for the last nearly 3 years, this Court is also of the view that the respondent SBI will have to pay interest on the unpaid rent, @ 6% per annum till final payment of the said amount is made to the petitioner. Page No.# 5/5

¶8The respondent SBI shall also pay to the petitioner the interest free rental deposit equivalent to 6 months' rent in terms of the NIT No.SBIIMS/GHY/2019-20/83 (Annexure-3), within 3(three) weeks from today.

¶9The respondent SBI is also directed to execute a lease deed with the petitioner in terms of the letter dated 04.04.2020, issued by the Assistant General Manager, SBI (Annexure-4). The petitioner, on the other hand, is directed to ensure that all the facilities/benefits there were to be made available by the landlord, should be provided to the respondent SBI including running water, within a period of 3(three) weeks from today.

¶10The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Michael Zothankhuma JUDGE

Case details

Parties and counsel

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010212782023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/5589/2023o AMARoGUPTAo S/O-oRAJENDRAoKUMARoGUPTA,o R/O-oR.P.oROAD,oGANESHGURI,o GUWAHATI-o781006,o DISTRICT-oKAMRUP(M),oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo5oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSECRETARY,o MINISTRYoOFoFINANCE,oNORTHoBLOCK,o CENTRALoSECRETARIAT,oNEWoDELHI. 2:THEoSTATEoBANKoOFoINDIA oAoPUBLICoSECTORoBANKINGoANDoFINANCIALoSERVICESoSTATUTORYo BODY o CONSTITUTEDoUNDERoTHEoSTATEoBANKoOFoINDIAoACT o1955 o HAVINGoITSoHEADQUARTERSoAToSTATEoBANKoBHAWAN o M.C.oROAD oNARIMANoPOINT oMUMBAI o MAHARASHTRA oREPRESENTEDoBYoITSoCHAIRMAN. 3:THEoCHIEFoGENERALoMANAGER oSTATEoBANKoOFoINDIA oGUWAHATIoCIRCLE Page No.# 2/5 LOCAL HEAD OFFICE G.S. ROAD DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 DISTRICT KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. 4:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE REGION-I ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE G.S. ROAD SWAGOTA SQUARE 6TH FLOOR BHANGAGARH ABC POINT GAUHATI- 781005. 5:THE BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA MADGHARIA BRANCH MOTHER TERESA ROAD NARENGI TINIALI GUWAHATI- 781026. 6:THE CIRCLE HEAD AND ASSISTANT VICE-PRESIDENT (CIVIL) SBI INDIA INFRA MANAGEMENT SOLUTION PVT. LTD. CIRCLE OFFICE 3RD FLOOR SBI LHO BUILDING G.S. ROAD DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H AGARWAL Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I. Page No.# 3/5 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.