The High Court upheld the lower court's order for the tenant to deposit admitted rent during pending ejectment proceedings, emphasizing the necessity of fulfilling rental obligations.

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order of the concerned Court in Commercial O.S.No.194/2023, which directs deposit of admitted rent from the date of filing of the suit i.e., 06.02.2023 till 29.02.2024, which would amount to Rs.16,38,000/- and continue to deposit the rent per month.

2. Heard Sri. Shravan S. Lokre, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. S. Guru Prasanna, learned counsel appearing for the caveator/respondent and have perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to project that there is dispute with regard to the rent. If the amount is reduced, he is ready and willing to pay.

4. The concerned Court on the application passes the following order:

"7. Point No. 1: Perused the records. The plaintiff filed this application at the stage of Plaintiff evidence. This suit is filed for ejectment and Plaintiff claimed the relief of arrears of rent of Rs. 62,25,036/- (as due on 31.08.2022) and till filing of the suit totally amounting to Rs. 90,66,548/- and mense profits/damages at the rate of Rs. 2,00,000/- per month from 01.09.2022 till 31.01.2023 along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum amounting to Rs. 45,000/- totally amounting to Rs. 10,45,000/- and also prays that the damages at the rate of Rs. 10,00,000/- per month from the date of the decree till the date of handing over the physical possession of the suit schedule property.

8. In the written statement as well as objection the Defendant has denied the claim of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff has claimed Rs. 2,00,000/- per month from 01.09.2022 till 31.01.2023 along the interest at the rate of 18% per annum. Now the plaintiff has come with this application and sought direction to Defendant deposit rate of rent of Rs.1,26,000/- per month from the date of filing of the suit

9. According, to the Plaintiff that the lease agreement dated 12.07.2017 expired on 12.07.2019. The renewed lease period on 01.08.2019 expired on 31.07.2021 and he has specifically stated that the Defendant has paid a sum of Rs. 10 lakh by way of cheque as security deposit which was carried forward for the subsequent renewal. The Defendant also agreed that in the event of non-payment of rent for more than three months the Plaintiff holds the right to deduct the total cumulative outstanding/unpaid rent amount adding 12% interest on total outstanding from the security deposit. Since the defendant has committed breach of his agreement, became chronic defaulter in payment of rent etc., the security amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-so deposited is forfieted as agreed between the parties. Further, the Defendant is continued to be is possession of the schedule property without or rights of legal justification. The tenancy is already terminated. Hence, the Defendant is holding the schedule property as a 'Trespasser'.

10. The Plaintiff has relied upon a decision in Kalai Selvan vs. J. Vishnkumar in WP No. 5639 of 2023 wherein Hon'ble High court held that "As already noted supra, as per the law laid down by Hon'ble High court of Karnataka in the case of Bangalore Builders (P) Limited vs. P.P. Anthony, reported at ILR 1978 Kar 782, the court has inherent powers during the pendency of ejectment suit to direct the tenant to pay to the landlord, the admitted rate of rent.

11. In the present case, on perusal of averments of the written statement, it discloses that the Plaintiff had sought for payment of rental in cash and in view of the same the lease agreement and its terms were complied and the rents were paid up to date. Because of this reason that the Plaintiff agreed and without any objections or claims thereof executed the agreement of lease deed 01-09-2019.

12. Further, in Statement of Admissions and Denials, the Defendant has agrred to rental agreement from 12.07.2017