State Bank of India, Through the Assistant General Manager vs Thanhlira Hauva, S/o. Hauva (L)

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Gau) 493

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MARLI VANKUNG, J.
State Bank of India, Through the Assistant General Manager and Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
Thanhlira Hauva, S/o. Hauva (L) – Respondent
RFA No.14 Of 2022, I.A.(Civil) No.130 Of 2022
Decided On : 20-03-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: C. Malsawmtluanga.
For the Respondent: Mr. Lalfakawma.

Headnote:
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 96 - Order 41 - Mizoram Civil Courts Act, 2005 - Section 17 - Lease agreement - Rents - Appellants had executed an Agreement dated with respondent that first floor of the property of respondent which comprises of an area of 2000 sq.ft., would be rented by appellants only, for a period of 5 years - Agreement was subject to renewal for a further period from date of expiry - After expiry date of rental agreement, no rental agreement or renewal or extension of rental agreement was made between the parties - Appellants had in an effort to shift premises in a area within Zarkawt had made a newspaper publication on however since they did not find an alternative building appellants continue to occupy the building and continued to pay Rs.18,000/-per month - Both parties thereafter tried to come to some settlement with regards to the new rental rates but could not arrive at any agreement -Whether there is any agreement signed by parties for new rental amount claimed for? - Whether the increased rate is too excessive? – Held, court is also of considered opinion that the respondent should not be made to suffer by imposing the terms of expired lease agreement when appellant bank failed to vacate premises for a period about 4(four) years after they were asked to re allocate on 06.07.2011 when respondent refused renewal of lease agreement once it expires on which was Exhibited - Learned counsel for the respondent also submits that appellant bank has deposited 50% from the decretal amount of Rs. 16,86,000 passed in the impugned Judgment and order dated 31.12.2021 along with interest incurred which amounts to Rs.8,97,852/-and that the said amount has been released to the respondent. In view of the above, this court finds that, on the failure of the rival parties to come to any agreed rent amount, the ends of justice would be met if the appellant bank deposited the balance amount - First Appeal stands disposed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Zodinpuia Hnamte, learned counsel for the appellants along with Mr. Lalfakawma, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This is an appeal under Order 41 r/w Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as well as Section 17 of the Mizoram Civil Courts Act, 2005 against the impugned Judgment & Order dated 13.12.2021 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge-IV, Aizawl District, Aizawl in Money Suit No. 9/2016.

3. Facts of the case in a nutshell is that the appellants had executed an Agreement dated 01.08.2006 with the respondent that the first floor of the property of the respondent which comprises of an area of 2000 sq.ft., would be rented by the appellants @Rs. 18,000/-(Rupees eighteen thousand) only, for a period of 5 years (i.e. till 01.08.2011). The agreement was subject to renewal for a further period from the date of expiry. However, after the expiry date of the rental agreement, no rental agreement or renewal or extension of rental agreement was made between the parties. The appellants had in an effort to shift the premises in a area within Zarkawt had made a newspaper publication on 18.07.2012 however since they did not find an alternative building the appellants continue to occupy the building and continued to pay Rs.18,000/-per month. On 19.08.2013, the respondents wrote a letter to the appellants stating his desire to raise the rent amount while mentioning the rental rates paid by other banks located at the same locality, i.e. HDFC, Zarkawt branch which was paying Rs.36.68 per sq.ft and at 1230 sq.ft was paying Rs. 45,000 per month, and ICICI Bank was paying close to Rs.1,40,00/-per month at the rate of Rs.35/-per sq ft. Thereafter on 28.09.2013 he again wrote to the appellants that the rent of the premises occupied by the appellants would increase and shall be Rs.72,000/-per month at the rate of Rs. 36/-per sq.ft from October 2013 till December 2013 and for the appellants to vacate the premises since the lease agreement expired on 01.08.2011 and that the lease period of two years would be @ of Rs.25 per sq.ft i.e Rs. 50,000/ per month for a period of 25 months. On 09.10.2013, the respondent wrote a similar letter to the appellant. Both the parties thereafter tried to come to some settlement with regards to the new rental rates but could not arrive at any agreement. The appellants in the meantime, continued to pay the rent amount of Rs. 18,000/-per month as per their previous agreement, while they continued to look for a new office building in the same locality and moved out to a new office during the month of March, 2015. After the appellants vacated the office, the respondent wrote a letter dated 23.03.2015 on referring to his previous letters dated 23.08.2013, 30.09.2013, and 7.10.2013, mentioned that as per the above correspondences the appellant bank was informed to pay a monthly Rs, 75,000/-at the rate of Rs. 35 per sq. ft since the rate of Rs. 9 per sq. ft was no longer acceptable. However since the appellant Bank had continued to stay in the premises for over a year without any reply, the Respondent claimed arrears of rent payable by the appellants from the month of October 2013 to February 2015 @Rs. 72,000/-per month which after deducting the Rs. 18,000/-per month for the said period amounted to Rs. 9,18,000/-. It was also mentioned that will not be charging the rent for the month of March 2015.

4. However since no steps was taken by the appellant, the respondent/ plaintiff approached the Court of Senior Civil Judge-IV, Aizawl District in Money Suit No. 9/2016 for payment of the amount of Rs. 16,86,000/-as per the following break up.

Sl. No.	Period	Amount Payable (In INR)	Amount Paid (In INR)	Difference (In INR)	Actual Amount Payable (In INR)
1.	01.09.2011 to 30.09.2013 i.e. 24 months	50,000/-	18,000/-	50,000 – 18,000 =32,000/-	32,000 x 24 months = 7,68,000/-
2.