Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJIT KUMAR
Salauddin – Appellant
Versus
Mahemunir – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. landlord's claim of arrears was unfounded. (Para 3) |
| 2. compliance with procedural rules is essential for eviction. (Para 4 , 6 , 9) |
| 3. deposits of rent were made with sufficient notice to landlord. (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. judgment and decree set aside; process for arrears stipulated. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT :
Ajit Kumar, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.
2. This petition arises out of an order dated 23.10.2019 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 14, Varanasi in Small Cause Revision No. 05 of 2019 affirming the judgment and decree passed by Judge, Small Causes, Varanasi dated 06.12.2018 in Small Cause Case No. 84 of 2008; Smt. Mahemunir and another vs. Salauddin and another .
3. Briefly stated facts are that landlord respondents instituted a case for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent in view of notice issued by them on 23rd September, 2008 determining the tenancy. In initial round of litigation, the trial court did not find the petitioners to be defaulter in payment of rent holding that sufficient deposits were made by them continuously in
Tenants cannot be evicted for non-payment of rent if they have made proper deposits under legal requirements, and landlords had knowledge of these deposits.
Strict compliance with statutory provisions for rent deposits is mandatory; failure to comply invalidates the deposit and can lead to eviction.
Section 30 of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 cannot be invoked for rent deposits once an eviction suit is pending, requiring adherence to procedural rules of the ongoing legal proceedings.
A tenant's failure to communicate rent deposits and respond to rent demands constitutes default, justifying eviction under the Bombay Rent Act.
Sufficient deposits under Section 20(4) allow a tenant to maintain defense against eviction; compliance with procedural requirements of Order 15 Rule 5 can be rectified without voiding statutory prot....
A tenant must deposit all arrears of rent, including time-barred amounts, to claim protection from eviction under Section 15(3) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act.
Tenant can only deposit rent in Court as long as landlord has refused to accept rent – Once landlord expresses his willingness to accept rent, tenant has no option but to deposit rent to landlord.
The judgment emphasized the mandatory nature of the provisions of the Rent Control Act and the requirement for the tenant to offer rent to the landlord before depositing it in Court.
Timely application and deposit of rent, even if slightly delayed due to holidays, fulfill statutory requirements preventing eviction under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act.
Compliance with statutory requirements for rent deposit is mandatory for tenants to avoid eviction under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Building Act.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
