Intentional overstay by the appellants and delay in responding to the landlord's requests justified the award of enhanced rent. The court's power to avoid multiplicity of proceedings was exercised to award rent till the date of handing over possession.

JUDGMENT :

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

1. The present Appeal Suit is filed against the judgment and decree dated 08.12.2021 passed in O.S. No. 1187 of 2019 on the file of the VII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.

2. The defendants are the appellants. The respondent/plaintiff instituted a Suit in O.S. No. 1187 of 2019 for the relief to direct the defendants to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 16,67,360/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Sixty Seven Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty only) due as on 01.02.2019 along with interest permissible under law and for the costs of the suit.

3. The facts in brief are that the respondent/plaintiff rented out the ground floor of his premises at AB 147, New No. 3, Plot No. 5132, III Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600040 for the functioning of the appellants/UCO Bank through lease deed dated 06.03.2009. The lease became effective from 01.06.2008 for a period of 10 years. Rent at Rs. 30/- per Sq. ft. was fixed for 1535 Sq. ft. (Rs. 46,050/- per month) and Rs. 50/- per Sq. ft. for 100 Sq. ft. for the ATM area (Rs. 5000/- per month) totalling Rs. 51,050/- per month. Rent agreed to be revised by 25% for every five year term. The Appellants/Bank has paid a sum of Rs. 3,30,000/- towards advance, but in the lease deed, it has been wrongly mentioned as Rs. 3,06,300/-. Rent from 01.06.2013 till 31.05.2018 was enhanced to Rs. 63,812.50/-. The lease expired on 31.05.2018. The appellants state that the negotiations were continued regarding renewal of lease. The respondent also agreed on 02.06.2018 to renew the lease subject to payment of monthly rent of Rs. 2,90,950/-. However, the rent proposed by the respondent was not agreeable for the appellants/Bank. On 24.06.2018, the respondent/landlord has stated that reduced rent of Rs. 2,73,600/- was agreeable. However, the issue was not finalized and the parties have not settled the matter nor renewed the lease, which was expired on 31.05.2018.

4. The respondent/Landlord claimed Rs. 12,58,772/- towards usage and damages from 01.06.2018. Thereafter, the respondent filed O.S. No. 1187/2019, claiming a sum of Rs. 16,67,361/-. The rent claimed in the suit was a sum of Rs. 2,73,600/- per month on the ground that the rented premises situates in Anna Nagar area, which is a prime locality and higher rental value is prevailing. The appellants filed a written statement and contested the case by stating that the respondent is claiming rent at the rate of 456% over the existing rent and at no point of time, the said enhancement was agreed by the appellants/Bank and thus, the suit claim is false and untenable. However, the suit decreed as prayed for a sum of Rs. 16,67,360/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of plaint on 08.12.2021. The appellants/Bank adjusted the advance amount of Rs. 3,30,000/- and paid monthly rent of Rs. 63,812.50/- without any default till 03.01.2020, on which date, the appellants/Bank vacated the premises and handed over possession to the respondent/landlord. Thus, as per the decree, a sum of Rs. 22.23 Lakh was due as on the date of filing of the present appeal suit in March 2022 and a sum of Rs. 23,00,360/- is due as of December 2022.

5. The appellants/Bank contention is that even in case of 100% enhancement of rent from 01.06.2018, the rent payable until January 2020 will be only Rs. 12,12,438/- (19 months). Thus, the appellants/Bank prays that the appeal suit is to be allowed.

6. The respondent/landlord objected the contentions raised on behalf of the appellants/Bank by stating that admittedly, the lease deed executed between the appellants/Bank and the respondent/Landlord expired on 31.05.2018 and from 01.06.2018 onwards, the appellants/Bank is overstaying in the premises without any lease or permission. Therefore, the rent payable during the subsistence of the lease agreement cannot be continued since the respondent/landlord claimed the monthly rent of Rs.