Licensee Whose Licence Expired Cannot Seek Injunction to Stay On: Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Second Appeal

The appellant sued for a permanent injunction against threatened eviction, pleading that he had been allowed to place a cabin on the respondent society's premises on monthly rent (para 2). Under Exhibit 4, accepted by both sides, the licence ran for 11 months, from 15 August 2000 to 15 July 2001 (paras 6-7). He sued after the society's employees came to remove the cabin on 27 September 2001 (para 7). The trial court dismissed the suit on 12 April 2007, and the Additional District Judge No. 3, Ajmer dismissed his first appeal on 15 September 2012 (paras 1-2). In the second appeal he claimed lawful possession, protection under the 1964 Act and lack of a termination notice (para 3).

The Court found that the licence was for 11 months only and expired on 15 July 2001, well before the cause of action of 27 September 2001 (para 7). The Trial Court had found no prima facie case for an injunction and observed that the licence, though never terminated by the defendant, had ended by efflux of time (para 7). The First Appellate Court had considered the plea of extension, and a person whose licence has expired and has not been extended cannot be protected (para 8). The 1964 Act provides a summary procedure of show-cause notice and an eviction order by the Estate Officer, and its Section 10A bars civil courts from suits on eviction from public premises (para 9). If the appellant relied on that Act, he could not file a second appeal, and invoking the civil court's jurisdiction by a suit was "an abuse of the process of law" (para 10). This was a simple case of an expired licence; the courts below showed no perversity or illegality, and, measured against the Section 100 CPC tests in the Supreme Court decisions it cited, no substantial question of law arose (paras 11-16).