Back
AMIT BANSAL
Mehra Jewel Palace Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Miniso Life Style Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
Key Points: - The COVID-19 pandemic constitutes a force majeure event under Clause 12 of the Lease Deed (Act of God and Embargo) and affects April–May 2020 rent (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The force majeure does not benefit the lessee alone; both parties must bear the impact, with the court directing 50% rent payment for April–May 2020 and continuing rent from 1 June 2020 to 14 December 2020, plus interest at 18% (!) (!) (!) . - The court rejects a full waiver of rent beyond May 2020, noting reopenings and lack of termination by lessee; liability for post-June 2020 rent and possession handover is affirmed (!) (!) . - The plaintiff is entitled to recover arrears of rent, interest, GST, penalties/fines, electricity and water charges, with set-off against security deposits and prior payments (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The court declines penal rent under Clause 14.2 due to absence of proven breach caused by defendants, given invocation of force majeure (!) (!) . - The possession was handed over on 14 December 2020; decree to be drawn for amounts due up to that date, with specified calculations and set-off rights (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT
Amit Bansal, J.
I.A. No.12212/2021 (u/O-XIII-A(4) of CPC)
1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff under Order XIII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), as applicable to commercial suits, seeking a summary judgment in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.3,83,09,444/- along with pendente lite and future interest.
2. Notice in the present application was issued on 20th September, 2021 and reply to the application on behalf of the defendant no.1 was filed on 27th November, 2021. Thereafter, plaintiff also filed rejoinder to the reply of the defendant no.1 in December, 2021.
3. Vide order dated 03rd March, 2022, the submission of the parties has been recorded that for deciding the issue of whether or not the defendants are entitled to the benefit of the force majeure clause, oral evidence would not be necessary.
FACTUAL MATRIX
4. Brief facts culminating into filing of the present suit are as follows.
4.1. Plaintiff is the owner of the property bearing No.C-11, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 consisting of the Ground Floor measuring about 2400 square feet and basement measuring about 400 square feet (demised premises).
4.2. A triparti
The court held that the COVID-19 pandemic constituted a force majeure event under the Lease Deed and that the defendants were entitled to the benefit of the force majeure clause insofar as payment of....
The ruling establishes that COVID-19 lockdown constituted a Force Majeure event, justifying non-payment of rent and validating lease termination under specified contractual terms.
Government regulations prohibiting access to leased premises during the COVID-19 pandemic constituted a Force Majeure event, excusing the defendant's performance under the lease agreement.
A tenant cannot avoid payment obligations under a lease due to financial distress unless a clear force majeure clause exists, and prior conduct may preclude claims of non-liability.
The inability to perform contractual obligations due to the pandemic does not absolve a party from responsibility if they have capacity to pay; pandemic-related protections apply strictly to inabilit....
Final relief cannot be given by way of interim measure.
The determination of the Lease Agreement's nature and the establishment of a prima facie case for restraining the respondent from acting on the Termination Notice were central legal points in the jud....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
