Leave and Licence Agreement – Entered between the Appellant and Respondent – Superseded by another licence agreement whereby Appellant became a licensee concerning the warehouse – Appellant defaulted in paying storage charges – Respondent instituted a suit for permanent injunction and to hand over vacant possession – Respondent specifically pleaded that it reserves its rights to claim arrears of rent and damages – Appellant filed counter suits – Respondent sought and was granted leave to file a separate suit vide an application under Order II Rule 2(3) CPC – Respondent filed a second suit claiming arrears of rent and damages – Appellant filed an application under Order VI Rule 11(d) read with Order II Rule
2 CPC – High Court dismissed revision petition challenging order granting leave to file a separate suit and application under Order VI Rule 11(d) read with Order II Rule 2 CPC. Held: The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision in light of the ruling in Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. ATM Constructions Pvt. Ltd., 2023 SCC Online SC 1614 – The Supreme Court held that the case was on a better footing because: (1) the plaintiff/respondent reserved the right to claim arrears of rent and damages separately, and (2) the two suits arise from separate causes of action. [Paras 16-18]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Aishani Narain (Verified by: Shadan Farasat, Adv.). Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.