Harshit Sharma | Amity Law School, Madhya Pradesh | 16th December 2019
Espire Infolabs Pvt Ltd. v/s. Sadhana Foundation Civil Appeal No. 9265/2019
FACTS OF THE CASE:
- The present appeal lies in respect of the recovery of the rent which was due to the landlord-Respondent herein from the period of 01.11.2015 to 31.01.2017 which was in reference to the registered lease deed dated 01.03.2015 (hereinafter referred as ‘registered lease deed’), but the contention was raised relying on the unregistered lease deed dated 01.01.2013 (hereinafter referred as ‘unregistered lease deed’), on account of which the previous recovery suit for the duration of 01.01.2013 to 30.10.2015 was dismissed by all forums, including the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
- The tenant-Appellant in the present case raised the arguments pointing out Clause 1(c) of the lease deed which provided that, the Lessee/ tenant was to carry out all the construction & interior work in respect of the tenanted property and the approximate cost that would incur in such activity will be ₹9,00,00,000 (Rupees Nine Crores Only) could be adjusted against the rent due to the landlord.
- In respect of the expenditure made by the Tenant, an account of approx. ₹3,00,00,000 (Rupees Three Crores Only) was provided, which was to be adjusted against the total rent for the period of 15 months due to the landlord and rent fixed per the deed and which was provisionally fixed by the Rent Controller was same to be ₹7,50,000 (Rupees Seven Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) which was calculated to be recovered of approx. ₹1,12,50,000 (Rupees One Crore Twelve Lakhs Fifty Thousand only).
- Thus, the amount of ₹1,12,50,000 were to be adjusted against the expenditure made by the Tenant and remaining amount was to be Paid by the Landlord, per the contention raised by the Appellants in the present case.
- But, the Landlord-Respondent categorically denied the validity of the registered lease deed, as the Trustee who entered the unregistered lease deed Mr. Ajay Sharma, was at the time of latter deed, removed and thus, was not governed by the registered deed but was to be governed by the unregistered lease deed, which didn’t carry the similar clause 1(c) as it was embodied in the registered one.
Therefore, the Landlord was entitled to recover the whole due amount without any adjustment and set-off. Thus, the present appeal.
ISSUES RAISED
- Whether the unregistered lease deed contents are admissible in evidence and the same is properly stamped or not will be of greater concern to quote its admissibility?
- Whether the lease deed of 2013 or that of 2015 will govern the rights of the parties?
- Whether Shri Ajay Sharma was a trustee and entitled to execute the lease deed of 2015?
- Even if the lease deed of 2015 will govern the rights of the parties, what amount has been spent by the Appellant?
RULING OF THE COURT/ THE COURT HELD THAT:
- As all the material placed on record, for the purpose of ascertaining the amount spent by the Appellant, the same shall be of the subject matter of evidence and will be evaluated on the touch stone of leading the evidences and cannot be decided at this stage, which was not in the case of previous appeal for recovery of rent between the same parties and same subject matter.
- Following
the aforementioned reason, the present appeal was dismissed while giving the
following directions:
- The tenant shall be liable to pay rent @ ₹3,75,000 w.e.f. 01.11.2015 till the proceedings before the Rent Controller is finally disposed and thereby landlord is not required to file any separate eviction petition for subsequent periods.
- Tenant shall submit the rent @ ₹3,75,000 w.e.f. 01.11.2015 till 30.11.2019, after adjusting his payment made before 31.01.2020.
- Tenant shall furnish tangible security in sum of ₹3,00,00,000 (Rupees Three Crores Only), in case the Rent Controller decides against the Tenant Appellant.
- Rent Controller is directed to take up this matter on urgent basis and dispose off the same within 6 months from the date of this judgment.
Leave a Reply