BAI CHANCHAL & ORS. vs SYED JALALUDDIN & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the lease in question did not constitute 'premises' under Section 4(2)(b) of the Bombay Rent Restriction Act, 1939, as it was primarily for constructing houses rather than for business or trade. The Court clarified that the consent decree did not create a new tenancy, as it merely allowed the judgment-debtors to remain in possession for five years while paying mesne profits, thus not contravening the Act. Additionally, the Court affirmed the legality of passing multiple decrees in the same suit under Order 23, Rule 3 and Order 12, Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.