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

2018 Supreme(P&H) 2544

ANIL KSHETARPAL
Hira Lal – Appellant
Versus
Ram Lal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:Mr. Tribhawan Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Ashok Goel, Advocate, for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J. - Landlord-petitioner is in the revision petition against the judgment passed by the learned appellate authority. The question which needs consideration is:-

“Whether an unregistered lease deed/rent note of immovable property making a provision for increase of rent after every 3 years by 20% can be enforced?”

2. It is undisputed that the rent note between the parties was executed on 05.10.1998, starting the tenancy with effect from 01.10.1998. The rent agreed to be paid was Rs.2,000/- per month. As per rent note, period of tenancy was for a period of 11 months. However, at the end of the rent note, a note was given that after expiry of every 3 years of the tenancy, rent would increase by 20%.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this court in the case of Smt. Hardev Kaur and others v. M/s Ghazal Restaurant, Chandigarh, 1992 Current Law Journal, 704 to contend that such clause can be enforced as the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 does not bar the agreement to increase the rent.

4. No doubt, the aforesaid Division Bench judgment do lay down as contended by learned counsel for the petitioner.









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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top