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

2010 Supreme(P&H) 2377

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Alok Singh, J.
Baseshar Nath Trust
Versus
Kripo Devi
C.R. No. 6753 of 2007,6756 of 2007,6754 of 2007,6755 of 2007,
Decided On : AUGUST 19, 2010

IMPORTANT POINT
Eviction--Arrears of Rent--Court cannot grant opportunity to defendant to deposit arrears of rent when tenant denying relationship of landlord-tenant and not paying rent.

Headnote:Haryana Urban Rent Restriction Act, S.13--Assessment of Rent--Relationship of landlord-tenant denied by tenant--There is no question of granting any opportunity to tenant to deposit amount--Learned Appellate Court was not within its jurisdiction while permitting appellant tenant to tender entire amount and to give benefit to tenant--Impugned order passed by learned Appellate Authority-- Set aside--Order of learned Rent Controller for eviction restored. (Para 11, 12 & 13)

Judgment

Alok Singh, J.

1. Present petition is filed by the landlord-petitioner challenging the order dated 23.08.2007 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Ambala, whereby the learned Appellate Authority allowed the appeal filed by the tenant-respondents and dismissed the eviction petition filed by the petitioner herein.

2. The brief facts of the present case are that landlord - petitioner herein filed a suit for eviction against the tenant on the ground that the tenant is in arrears of rent and has not paid rent and taxes w.e.f. 01.06.1994 till the date of filing of the eviction petition.

3. The tenant - respondent filed written statement denying the relationship of landlord-tenant between the parties. The suit for eviction was filed on 28.05.1994. When suit was at the final stage for the first time, after almost ten years, tenant filed application before the learned Rent Controller on 17.03.2004 for the assessment of rent. However, no decision was taken thereon and eviction petition filed by the landlord - petitioner herein was allowed directing the eviction of the tenant on the ground of arrears of rent after observing that there is a relationship of landlord-tenant between the parties.

4. Feeling aggrieved from the judgment passed by the learned Rent Controller dated 05.03.2005, an appeal was preferred by the tenant. Learned Appellate Authority has observed that the learned Rent Controller committed illegality by not taking any decision on the application moved by the tenant on 17.03.2004 for assessment of the rent. During the appeal, another application was moved by the tenantappellants for the assessment of the rent and sought permission to deposit the entire arrears of rent. The learned Appellate Authority allowed the application filed by the tenantappellant and permitted the tenant to deposit the entire arrears of rent with interest and cost which was paid by the tenant and ultimately appeal was allowed finding that tenant is not in arrears of rent, since the entire payment was made by the tenant during the pendency of the appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner - landlord vehemently argued that if relationship of landlord-tenant is denied by the tenant, then there is no question of assessing the rent and there is no question of permitting the defendants to deposit the assessed rent along with interest and cost. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner - landlord that tenant himself did not move any application for assessment of the rent for long 10 years during the pendency of the litigation and ultimately, finding that tenant is going to loose the case, he moved an application on 17.03.2004 with ulterior motive. There was no need for the learned Rent Controller to take a decision thereon. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Appellate Court has committed jurisdictional error and exceeded in its jurisdiction while assessing the rent and permitting the tenant to deposit the entire arrears of rent with interest and cost during the appeal.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent - tenant argued that relationship of tenantlandlord is denied bonafidely, since the society - landlord has filed so many eviction petitions and all the tenants were of the view that society is not a landlord, hence all the tenants took the same defence in their respective cases and when in one of the case, decision came that there is a relationship of landlord-tenant and society is a landlord then bona fidely application was moved by the tenant before the learned Rent Controller, which ought to have been allowed and the learned Appellate Court committed no illegality while permitting the respondent to deposit the entire amount during the pendency of the appeal.

7. Now, question before this Court is as to whether Court can grant opportunity to the defendant to deposit the arrears of rent when tenant denying the relationship of the landlord-tenant and not paying th









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