Can The Request Of Enhancement Of Rent Be Decided In Eviction Proceedings? Supreme Court To Consider

The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to consider whether the request for enhancement of rent can be decided eviction proceedings.

The bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian was considering a SLP assailing Punjab and Haryana High Court order dated December 10, 2021 whereby the High Court had remanded the matter to decide the issue of enhancement of rent in eviction proceedings to the Appellate Authority.

While issuing notice the bench also stayed the proceedings before the Appellate Authority under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, Chandigarh.

"Issue notice, returnable within four weeks. In the meantime, further proceedings before the Appellate Authority under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, Chandigarh shall remain stayed," bench in its order said.

The petitioner's counsel had contended that there is no statutory provision for deciding the request for enhancement of rent in eviction proceedings. He further contended that thus the High Court had erred in law in remanding the matter to decide such issue of enhancement of rent in eviction proceedings.

Case Before Punjab & Haryana High Court

Surinder Singh ("landlord") had leased two separate premises to the Vimal Jindal, for a period of 10 years. As the period of lease had to expire on April 30, 2010, Surinder Singh ("tenant") sent a notice to him with a request to vacate the tenanted premises. One of the landlords on February 19, 2010 sent another notice calling upon the tenant to discuss the matter with his partners and let the landlords know if their offer for the payment of prevailing market rent is acceptable to the tenant and his partners or not. On May 25, 2010, the landlord filed the eviction petition.

The counsel representing the landlord had contended that the landlords were always in need of their premises, for a bona fide necessity. On the other hand, the tenant's counsel contended that the notice dated February 19, 2010 was admitted and proved and that the rent petition was filed only because the tenant did not agree to the landlord's unreasonable demands.

The bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal opined that the matter was required to be remitted to the Appellate Authority to consider the effect of the notice served by one of the landlords calling upon the tenant to increase the rent.

"This Court is of the considered view that the matter is required to be remitted to the Appellate Authority, to consider the effect of the notice served by one of the landlords calling upon the tenant, to increase the rent. In the considered opinion of the Court, neither the learned Rent Controller nor the Appellate Authority has examined the issue in proper perspective," bench had observed.

Case Title: Surinder Singh Dhillon & Ors. v. Vimal Jindal & Ors.| SLP 21200/2021

Coram: Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian

Click Here To Read/Download Order