VADIVEL CHETTY v. ABDU
1953 Present:
Weerasooriya J.
VADIVEL CHETTY, Appellant, and ABDU, Respondent
S. C. 254-C. R. Colombo, 37,171
Landlord and
tenant-Enhancement of rent-Not effective until there is agreement- Refusal of
landlord to accept rent due-Resulting position-Rent Restriction Act, No. 29 of
1948, s. 13 (1) (a).
Where a tender of payment of the rent due was made by the tenant and was refused
by the landlord on the ground that, as the monthly rent had been enhanced by
him, a larger amount was due-
Held : (i) A landlord's unilateral act in demanding payment of a higher rent
than that agreed upon does not render the tenant liable to pay the higher rent
demanded.
(ii) Where a landlord refuses to accept the rent due when it is tendered to him,
and has by his conduct made it clear that he will not, in the future, accept
rent at the rate agreed upon, the tenant is not obliged to tender the rents for
the subsequent months as and when they fall due. The tenant must, however, pay
all the unpaid rent within a reasonable time if the landlord subsequently
demands it or signifies his readiness to accept it.
(iii) Where the tenant has been given reasonable
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.