NDLI: M/s Paul Rubber Industries Private Limited Vs. Amit Chand Mitra & Anr.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Transfer of Property Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Issue for consideration:To what extent the Court can take cognizance of a clause, relating topurpose for which a lease is granted, contained in an unregistereddeed of lease for immovable property stipulating its duration fora period of five years.Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – ss.106, 107 – Unregisteredlease deed for a period of five years – Inadmissibility – Purposeof lease – If for ‘manufacturing purpose’ – Burden to prove –Tenancy of “month to month” character:Held: The subject agreement had a duration of five years with aprovision for renewal for a further period of five years – Hence,under the first part of s.107, for the said lease agreement to beadmissible, registration of the same would have been necessary– That is the mandate of s.107 and ss.17 and 49, 1908 Act – TheCourt cannot admit it in evidence – This is a prohibition for the Courtto implement and even if the Trial Court has taken it in evidence,the same cannot confer legitimacy to that document for beingtaken as evidence at the appellate stage – The parties cannotby implied consent confer upon such document its admissibility –Further, the lease was for use by the predecessor of the appellants“for the purpose of his business and/or factory” – The propertywas described in the schedule to be estimated 16 cottahs of land“with a factory shed/godown space” – Such description would notbe sufficient to establish that the same was for manufacturingpurpose – In the absence of a registered instrument, the courtsare not precluded from determining the factum of tenancy fromother evidence on record as well as the purpose of tenancy – Inthis case, factum of creation of tenancy has been established –But the purpose of tenancy, so as to attract the six months’ noticeperiod u/s.106 cannot be established by such evidence as in sucha situation, registration of the deed would have been mandatory –Burden of proving that the lease was for manufacturing purposelies on the party who claims it to be so – Onus was on theappellant-defendant to establish that manufacturing activity wasbeing carried on from the demised premises – A mere statement byDW-1 or the purpose of lease as specified in the lease agreementwould not be sufficient to demonstrate the purpose of lease tobe for manufacturing – This could be proved by explaining whatkind of work was being carried on in the factory shed however,in such a situation also, the registration of the deed would havebeen necessary – In absence of such registration, tenancy wouldhave been of “month to month” character – High Court did not errin dismissing the appellant’s appeal – Lease – Registration Act,1908 – ss.17, 49. [Paras 10, 11 and 14]Registration Act, 1908 – ss.17, 49 – Nature and character ofpossession – “collateral purpose” – Plea of the appellantrelying upon Sevoke Properties Ltd. v. West Bengal StateElectricity Distribution Company Limited (2020) 11 SCC 782that for establishing nature and purpose of possession, evenan unregistered document could be looked into as that wouldcome within the ambit of collateral purpose:Held: Sevoke Properties is not an authority for the proposition thatnature and character of the possession in an unregistered leasedeed could always constitute collateral purpose so that the Courtcould examine the deed for that reason – The purpose for whichlease is granted forms an integral part of the lease deed in thiscase and this very issue forms one of the main disputes – Theexpression “collateral purpose” has been employed in proviso tos.49 to imply that content of such a document can be used forpurpose other than for which it has been executed or entered intoby the parties or for a purpose remote to the main transaction –Nature and character of possession contained in a flawed document(being unregistered) in terms s.107, 1882 Act and ss.17 and 49,Registration Act can form collateral purpose when the “nature andcharacter of possession” is not the main term of the lease anddoes not constitute the main dispute for adjudication by the Court– Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – s.107. [Para 12]
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 854
Petitioner	M/s Paul Rubber Industries Private Limited
Respondent	Amit Chand Mitra & Anr.
SCR	[2023] 14 S.C.R. 28
Judgement Date	2023-09-25
Case Number	6149

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

M/s Paul Rubber Industries Private Limited Vs. Amit Chand Mitra & Anr.

Please Log-in to view this content

India Resurgence Arc Private Limited Vs. M/s. Amit Metaliks Limited & Anr.

M/s. Paragon Rubber Industries Vs. M/s. Pragathi Rubber Mills & Ors.

M/s. Premier Engineers Vs. M/s. Taj Rubber Industries and Anr.

Inderjeet Singh Sial Vs. M/s. Karam Chand Thapar

M/s. Martin & Harris Private Limited & Anr. Vs. Rajendra Mehta & Ors.

Rup Chand Gupta Vs. Raghuvanshi Private Limited & Anr.

Modi Rubber Limited Vs. Union of India and Anr.

Tara Chand Vs. Sagarbai @ Chaiyalibai

Union of India and Anr. Vs. M/s Jagjit Industries and Anr.

M/s Paul Rubber Industries Private Limited Vs. Amit Chand Mitra & Anr.

M/s Paul Rubber Industries Private Limited Vs. Amit Chand Mitra & Anr.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

India Resurgence Arc Private Limited Vs. M/s. Amit Metaliks Limited & Anr.

M/s. Paragon Rubber Industries Vs. M/s. Pragathi Rubber Mills & Ors.

M/s. Premier Engineers Vs. M/s. Taj Rubber Industries and Anr.

Inderjeet Singh Sial Vs. M/s. Karam Chand Thapar

M/s. Martin & Harris Private Limited & Anr. Vs. Rajendra Mehta & Ors.

Rup Chand Gupta Vs. Raghuvanshi Private Limited & Anr.

Modi Rubber Limited Vs. Union of India and Anr.

Tara Chand Vs. Sagarbai @ Chaiyalibai

Union of India and Anr. Vs. M/s Jagjit Industries and Anr.

M/s Paul Rubber Industries Private Limited Vs. Amit Chand Mitra & Anr.