SOORAJMULL NAGARMULL versus DALHOUSIE PROPERTIES LTD. AND ANR.

Citation: [1994] 3 S.C.R. 226 · Decided: 30-03-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, N. VENKATACHALA · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
SOORAJMULL NAGARMULL 
v. 
DALHOUSIE PROPERTIES LTD. AND ANR. 
MARCH 30, 1994 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
Tenancy Laws-Landlord tenant dispute-Compromise between par-
ties-Parties are directed to file a deed of compromise-Compromise deed to 
compromise of tenns stated in order. 
There was a long drawn litigation between landlord and tenant for 
about 40 years. During the pendency of the proceedings before the 
Supreme Court, the parties entered into a corapromise. 
Disposing of the appeal, this Court 
HELD : Parties shall file in the registry a deed of compromise, 
I 
duly signed by them. The compromise shall comprise of the terms as 
, ' 
specified in the order. [226-G] 
E 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2846 of 
1979. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.8.79 of the Calcutta High 
Court in Appeal No. 151 of 1975. 
F 
Shankar Kumar Ghosh, H.K. Puri, S.K. Puri and Rajeev Shroff for 
G 
the Appellant. 
P.P. Rao, Vishwanath Poddar, P.R. Ramasesh and Rathin Das for 
the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
The litigation that has been carried on for over 40 years has now 
ended in a compromise entered into by the parties. Counsel appearing for 
the parties are directed to file in the Registry a deed of compromise, duly 
H signed by parties within six weeks from today. That compromise shall 
226 
\ 
S. NAGARMULL v. DALHOUSIE PROPERTIES LTD. 
227 
comprise of the following terms : (1) That the appellant-tenant shall pay A 
· ~ 
for the suit premises monthly rent of rupees two lakhs (Rs. 2 lakhs), 
commencing from January 1, 1994. The rents for the months of January 
and February, 1994 shall be paid on or before July 31, 1994. The rent for 
the month of March, 1994 shall be paid on or before 12th April, 1994. For 
subsequent tenancy months. The tenant shall pay the monthly rent on or B 
before 12th of every succeeding month. 
(2) All taxes, Municipal or otherwise payable in respect of the snit 
property shall be borne by the respondent-landlord. 
(3) The tenant/appellant shall be liable to pay to the respon-
C 
dent/landlord as compensation for past use and occupation of the suit 
premises, as hereunder. 
(i) 
(ii) 
For the period between 1.1.1979 and 
31.12.1983 @ Rs. 15,000 
{Rupees Fifte~n Thousand) per month. 
For the period between 1.1.1984 and 
31.12.1988 @ Rs. 25,000 
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) per month. 
(iii) 
For the period between 1.1.1989 and 
31.12.1993 @ Rs. 35,000 
(Rupees Thirty Five Thousand) per month. 
D 
E 
( 4) The amounts payable as compensation for suit premises under F 
Clause 3, less the amounts already paid towards rent and licence fee for 
,; 
the suit premises shall be the outstanding amount of compensation still 
payable by the tenant to the landlord. 
(5) The Cheques/Drafts (numbering 136) handed over by the Appel-
lant/tenant to the respondent/landlord towards payment of arrears of rent G 
and licence fee, agregating to Rs. 6,62,320 shall be returned to the Appel-
lant/tenant and within 60 days of such return the appellant/tenant shall pay 
to the respondent/landlord the said amount of Rs. 6,62,320. This amount 
of Rs. 6,62,320 shall be adjusted against the amounts referred to under 
Clause 4 above as amounts already paid towards rent and licence fee H 
228 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1994] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
towards suit premises and the balance amount remaining thereafter out of 
the total amount of compensation payable, shall be paid by the appel-
lant/tenant in two and one half (2V2) years in equal five half-yearly instal-
ments. 
B 
If there is any default committed in payment of balance amount of 
col)lpensation in equal five half-yearly instalments, agreed to the tenant 
shall pay interest on the amounts which may fall due @ 25% per annum 
from the date on which such amounts may fall due till date of payment. 
Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court, the appellant had 
C deposited a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 with the Registry of this Court and the 
same is standing to the credit of the Respondent in the appeal. The 
Respondent is permitted to withdraw the same. The Registry is directed 
to issue a Cheque or a Draf~ as the case may be, in favour of the 
respondent for the said sum of Rs. 1,50,000. This amount also stand be 
D adjusted against amount of compensation payable under Clause 3 above. 
It is stated that from June 13, 1975 to November 15, 1979, a sum of 
Rs. 5,40,000 was paid to Mis M.G. Poddar, the Solicitor of 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.