Back
2023 Supreme(Telangana) 991
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Rangineni Surya Prakash and Another – Petitioners
Versus
Susham Bela – Respondent
C.R.P. No. 2490 of 2023
Decided On : 30-10-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Vedula Chitralekha
For the Respondent: V. Rohith
The obligation to pay rent continues beyond the lease expiration, affirming the landlord's right to claim both future and arrear rent payments until the lease is formally concluded.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XV-A Rule 1 - Civil revision petition challenging the order directing the petitioner to deposit rent and arrears in a suit for declaration and injunction concerning leased property - The court upheld the lower court's direction noting the importance of rental payments post lease expiration. (Paras 3-15)
(B) Lease agreements - Obligations - The lessee must deliver vacant possession post lease term and is liable for damages for continued occupation, emphasizing the enforceable nature of lease agreements and requisite adherence to terms. (Paras 10-14)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners are plaintiffs seeking declaration of title and injunction upon respondent's property claim with disputes over rental payments and the validity of lease and breach thereof. (Para 3-5)
Findings of Court:
The court found no illegality in the order requiring ongoing and arrears rent payments from the plaintiffs after lease expiration, affirming the owner’s right to claim rents. (Paras 14-15)
Issues: Whether the lower court erred in allowing rent deposit after the lease term, and the nature of obligations under the lease agreement post-expiration. (Para 8)
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the obligation to pay rent continues post-lease, highlighting that the lower court’s direction was proper and necessary to uphold the respondent’s rights. (Paras 13-15)
Result: Civil revision petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the tenancy and disputes over rent. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. legal argument on limits of deposit of rent under disputed tenancy. (Para 6 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court confirms the ongoing rent obligations based on lease agreement. (Para 7 , 14) |
| 4. distinctions made from previous relevant case law. (Para 13) |
| 5. final ruling dismissing the appeal upholding lower court's decision. (Para 15 , 16) |
ORDER :
1. Heard Mrs. Vedula Chitralekha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. V. Rohith, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent.
2. This civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed challenging the legality and propriety of the order dated 11.11.2022 in I.A. No. 274 of 2021 in O.S. No. 33 of 2021 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Adilabad whereunder the petition filed by the respondent/defendant under Order XV-A Rule 1 of C.P.C. was partly allowed.
PERUSED THE RECORD.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION.
DISCUSSION:
3. The petitioners in the present civil revision petition are the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 33 of 2021 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Adilabad which is a suit filed under Section 26 and Orders IV and VII C.P.C for declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of plaint schedule land and in the said suit I.A. No. 275 of 2021 had been filed by the respondent herein under Order XV-A Rule 1 of C.P.C. praying the Court to direct the 1st petitioner herein to deposit Rs.1,05,000/- in the Court and shall continue to deposit Rs.15,000/- every month thereafter within a week from 5th day of every month until further order or till the judgment is rendered or to pass any other order the Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. The plea of the respondent herein/defendant is that she let out the suit plot to the 1st petitioner/1st plaintiff for a period of three years from 01.11.2016 to 31.10.2019, under registered lease deed dated 01.11.2016 and ever since he deposited the monthly rent of Rs.15,000/- vide the last slip dated 26.02.2021 and that as per the terms of the lease deed, the 1st petitioner/1st plaintiff after expiry of the lease period of three years, has to deliver vacant position of the suit plot to her and in default thereof he has to pay Rs.500/- per day towards damages.
5. According to the respondent herein in the present C.R.P. the 1st petitioner/1st plaintiff deposited the rent at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per month for the lease period from 01.11.2016 to 31.10.2019 to the credit of her account bearing No. 20082837023 of Bank of Maharashtra, Adilabad and thereafter, deposited the rent at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month from November, 2019 to February, 2021 to the credit of the same account. She alleged that the 1st petitioner/1st plaintiff willfully committed default in payment of rent for the months of March and April, 2021 and falsely filed the suit along with his son (2nd petitioner/2nd plaintiff) falsely claiming that she had agreed to sell the plot and so the 2nd petitioner/2nd plaintiff who is his son contended that they are entitled for relief of declaration of title and injunction.
6. The petitioners herein filed counter asserting that the suit is filed for declaration of title and perpetual injunction and until and unless the issue with regard to title is decided the petition cannot be entertained.
7. The respondent herein got marked five documents on her behalf and the revision petitioners/plaintiffs marked four documents on their behalf. The learned trial Court after considering the material on record partly allowed the petition by directing the 1st petitioner/1st plaintiff to deposit rent of Rs.15,000/- per month into Court on 5th of every month till the disposal of the suit and to deposit the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month for the period from 04.10.2021 to the date of the order i.e. 11.11.2022 within three months.
8. Aggrieved by the said order d
