SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Siddhatha Singh - Appellant
Versus
Ajit Singh Bawa - Respondent
RFA(COMM) 40 of 2022 & CM Appls. 26156-158 of 2022
Decided On : 12-07-2022




Temporary non-use of premises does not exempt a tenant from paying rent; contractual obligations under the Lease remain enforceable despite COVID-19 restrictions.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XIII A - Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Appeal against trial court's judgment allowing summary judgment under Order XIII A - Respondent-landlord's suit for possession and arrears of rent for leased commercial property - Appellant failed to establish grounds for defense, claiming premises were unfit during lockdown - Court found premises fit for use, upholding Lease Deed terms - No provision for rent suspension - Temporary non-use does not invalidate Lease or suspend rent obligations. (Paras 1-18)

(B) Lease Deed - Terms - Parties bound by Lease Deed, appellant not entitled to suspend rent due to lockdown - Court affirmed obligations to pay rental dues as per explicit terms in Lease. (Paras 15-16)

(C) Force Majeure - Claim must be substantiated by Lease provisions; mere assertion insufficient - Contract provisions govern rights and obligations. (Paras 9, 15-18)

Facts of the case:
Respondent filed suit for possession and unpaid arrears against appellant for leased premises during COVID-19 lockdown. Appellant sought to avoid payment citing force majeure without exercising right to terminate Lease. Court established that non-payment was unjustified and Lease remained valid.

Findings of Court:
Respondent provided sufficient grounds to invoke contractual obligations; appellant had continued possession and was guilty of breaching Lease without legitimate grounds to withhold rent.

Issues: The primary issues included the applicability of the 'unfit to use' claim during lockdown and the respective obligations under the Lease Deed.

Ratio Decidendi: Court held that temporary non-use of premises does not warrant suspension of rent, and a claim of force majeure must align with Lease terms. Appellant's claims did not demonstrate legal merit, confirming the enforceability of contractual obligations.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. formation of lease agreement and tenant obligations. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. respondent's basis for lease termination. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. appellant's claims challenging court's decision. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. court's reasoning on tenant's obligations under lease. (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. judgment reinforcement and rejection of appeal. (Para 17 , 18)
6. final dismissal of the appeal. (Para 19)

JUDGMENT

Saurabh Banerjee, J. Appellant-tenant, the original defendant before the learned trial court (hereinafter referred as "Appellant"), has preferred the instant appeal against the impugned judgement dated 19.02.2022, whereby, the learned trial court has allowed the application under Order XIII A of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred as "CPC") read with Section 151, CPC read with Section 3 of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter collectively referred as "Order XIII A application") filed by the respondent-landlord, the original plaintiff before the learned trial court (hereinafter referred as "Respondent") and decreed the suit in favour of the respondent and against the appellant.

2. Succinctly put, the respondent instituted a suit for possession, arrears of rent along with mesne profits (hereinafter referred to as "suit") against the appellant, inter alia, claiming the following reliefs:

    "3.1. Pass an Order/Judgment/Decree in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant directing the Defendant to vacate the said Property at 19F, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi 110057; super area ad-measuring 1000 sq. ft. and deliver the peaceful, vacant possession to the Plaintiff;

    3.2. Pass an Order/Judgment/Decree in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant directing the Defendant to make a payment of INR 94,215.80/- [Indian Rupees Ninety Four Thousand Two Hundred Fifteen and Eighty Paise Only] as arrears of rent for the period of 23.05.2020 to 08.07.2020;

    3.3. Pass an Order/Judgment/Decree in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant directing the Defendant to pay liquidated damages to the Plaintiff for unauthorized occupancy of the Said Property @10000/- [Indian Rupees Ten Thousand Only];

    3.4. Pass an Order/Judgment/Decree in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant directing the Defendant to pay all dues (water, electricity, gas, maintenance and service charges) pertaining to the said Property, up till the date of delivering actual, physical and legal possession of the said Property to the Plaintiff;

    3.5. Pass an Order/Judgment/Decree in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant thereby restricting the Defendant from transferring/alienating/encumbering/creating third party rights or parting with possession of the Said Property at 19F, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi 110057."

3. Being the absolute owner of the commercial property bearing No. 19 F, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110 057 (hereinafter referred as "premises"), the respondent had given the said premises on lease to the appellant for it to carry out authorised commercial activity like running a spa or any other activity vide a registered Lease Deed dated 18.12.2010 (hereinafter referred as "Lease Deed") for a period of 15 years, commencing from 15.05.2010 to 14.05.2025 as per the terms and conditions set out therein.

4. It was during the subsistence of the aforesaid Lease Deed, that the unfortunate outbreak and spread of COVID-19 pandemic across India caused suffering to the public, including the appellant, primarily during the then prevailing lockdown period since and from March, 2020 for the ensuing months. This resulted in non payment of rent in compliance of the Lease Deed by the appellant to the respondent which in turn resulted in the respondent issuing legal notice(s) on 20.04.2020, 11.05.2020 and 28.05.2020 to the appellant calling upon him to pay the monthly rent as per the Lease Deed. So much so, in one such legal notice the respondent voluntarily offered to suspend the obl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top