Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 1999 (7) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1999 (7) TMI 717 - SC - Indian Laws

Issues:
1. Default in payment of rent leading to eviction under The Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960.
2. Interpretation of "sufficient cause" under Section 11(4) of the Act.

Analysis:

1. The case involved a tenant who entered into an agreement with the previous owner of the building for purchase but faced disputes leading to the Church repudiating the agreement. Subsequently, the building was sold to a new owner who filed for the tenant's eviction due to rent arrears. The Rent Controller ordered eviction when the tenant failed to deposit the arrears by the specified date. The tenant appealed, depositing the arrears later. The appellate authority allowed the appeal, but the High Court, on the subsequent purchaser's petition, reversed this decision. The tenant appealed to the Supreme Court challenging the High Court's decision.

2. The tenant argued that the circumstances of entering into an agreement with the previous owner and filing a suit for specific performance constituted "sufficient cause" under Section 11(4) of the Act for not depositing the arrears of rent on time. The relevant provisions of Section 11 mandate the deposit of arrears of rent and subsequent rent payments within the prescribed time. The term "sufficient cause" requires a showing of sincerity, bona fide, and reasonableness by the tenant to justify non-compliance. The tenant's failure to deposit the arrears by the specified date, denial of landlord-tenant relationship, and subsequent deposit before the appellate authority for hearing the appeal were deemed not bona fide. The tenant's claim of mistaken belief for non-depositing rent was considered an afterthought, lacking in bona fides. The tenant's consistent denial of being a tenant and failure to deposit rent as required by law did not constitute sufficient cause to condone the non-deposit of arrears.

3. The Supreme Court found no merit in the tenant's arguments, upholding the High Court's decision. The appeals were dismissed, and no costs were awarded.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates