B.N.AGARWAL, R.C.LAHOTI
Raminder Singh Sethi – Appellant
Versus
D. Vijayarangam – Respondent
ORDER
The landlord/respondent filed a suit for eviction of tenant-appellant on the ground available under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter the "Act", for short). Though the eviction was sought for on other grounds as well but this is the only ground on which eviction has been ordered by the High Court, and therefore, we shall confine ourselves to the question of availability of this ground for eviction.
2. The High Court has found that on the date of initiation of proceedings, the tenant - appellant was in arrears of rent which he neither paid nor tendered within two months of the date of service of notice on him demanding payment of the arrears of rent. However, it has also been found that the tenant-appellant had paid some amount by way of advance rent at the time of creation of tenancy. The details of the arrears and the advance rent are not relevant; suffice it to say if the amount of advance rent is adjusted against the amount of arrears found due and payable by the tenant then he is not in arrears. On the other hand, if the amount of advance rent is not available for adjustment then the tenant is in arrears. An
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.