9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (8) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lease on October 26, 1951 with the appellant in respect of premises Nos. 8 9, Mahatma Gandhi Road, (South Parade), Civil Station, Bangalore. It was stipulated that the lease would be for a period of 10 years in the first instance with effect from November 1, 1961 with an option to the lessee to renew the same as long as desired as provided . Clauses 9 and 10 which are material may be reproduced: 9. The lessee shall have the right to renew the lease of the scheduled premises at the end of the present period of ten years herein secured on the same rental of ₹ 450/per month, for a similar period and for further similar periods thereafter on the same terms and conditions as are set forth herein; and the Lessee shall be permitted and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y is embodied in Section 14 of the Transfer of Property Act, hereinafter called the Act. According to it no transfer of property can operate to create an interest which is to take effect after the lifetime of one or more persons living at the date of such transfer and the minority of some person who shall be in existence at the expiration of that period and to whom, if he attains full age, the interest created is to belong. It is well known that the rule against perpetuity is founded on the principle that the liberty of alienation shall not be exercised to its own destruction and that all contrivances shall be void which tend to create a perpetuity or place property for ever out of the reach of the exercise of the power of alienation . The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l within the expression transfer of property the transfer was for a period of ten years only by means of the indenture Exh. P-l. The stipulation relating to the renewal could not be regarded as transferring property or any rights therein. 6. In Ganesh Sonar v. Pumendu Narayan Singha and Ors. (1962) Patna 201. in the case of lease of land an option had been given to the lessor to determine the lease and take possession of the lease-hold land under specified conditions. The question was whether such a covenant would fall within the rule laid down in the English case Woodall v. Clifton (1905) 2.Ch.257 in which it was held that a proviso in a lease giving an option to the lessor to purchase the fee simple of the land at a certain rate was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ht have been the reason, the objection of perpetuity had never been taken to cases of covenants for renewal. The following observations of Farwell, J., which were quoted with approval by Lord Evershed. M. R. in Weg Motors Ltd. v. Hales and Ors. [1961] 3 A.E.I.R.181 are noteworthy : But now I will assume that this is a covenant for renewal running with the land; it is then in my opinion free from any taint of perpetuity because it is annexed to the land. See Rogers v. Hosegood (1900) 2 Ch.388 8. The equitable rule that the burden of a covenant runs with the land is to be found in Section 40 of the Act. This section reads : 40. Where for the more beneficial enjoyment of his own Immovable property, a third person, has, independently ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
