MUMBAI, March 19 -- The Bombay High Court on Tuesday dismissed a suit filed by a city businessman, who had challenged the termination of a century-old lease of 251 acres of salt pan land in Kanjurmarg. A single judge bench of Justice Sandeep Marne allowed a plea filed by the salt commissioner, an officer of the central government, for dismissal of the businessman's suit pending before the City Civil Court, holding that no cause of action survived for the suit as the lease had expired in 2016. The businessman, Maheshkumar Garodia, challenged the termination of the lease for two land parcels totalling to 251 acres and the subsequent transfer of possession of 15 hectares of land for the metro car shed. Both plots were leased out Garodia for 99 years commencing October 15, 1917, for the purpose of salt manufacture. However, on November 2, 2004, the lease was terminated by the salt commissioner over alleged violation of its terms, prompting Garodia to file a suit in the high court. The suit was later transferred to the City Civil Court, after its pecuniary jurisdiction was enhanced. During pendency of the suit, the lease expired on October 14, 2016. The central government, therefore, filed a plea before the City Civil Court, seeking dismissal of the suit on the grounds that the cause of action had come to an end and that the suit had become infructuous. The plea was strongly contested by Garodia, after which the City Civil Court in November 2022 dismissed the salt commissioner's plea, prompting the central government to move the high court in 2023. The salt commissioner contended that on account of expiry of the lease tenure, it was not necessary to adjudicate the validity issue of the lease termination. On the other hand, Garodia submitted that his claim for renewal of the lease depended on the issue of validity of termination of lease, and no interference was warranted in the 2022 order passed by the trial court. He urged the court to decide on the issue of lease termination. A single-judge bench of justice Sandeep V Marne, however, accepted the contentions of the central government, observing that once the lease period ended, the relief sought for declaration of the lease as "valid, subsisting and binding" could not survive. "The suit, which is dead, cannot be kept pending indefinitely for enabling the plaintiff to espouse for renewal of the lease," it said, while setting aside the lower court's 2022 order....