"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

"Obligation to Pay Rent Remained Unfulfilled": Kerala High Court Upholds Tenant's Eviction

05 September 2024 5:21 AM

By: Admin


Ernakulam, 12 September 2023 - The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, in a landmark judgment, upheld the eviction of a tenant, Subeesh, for failing to pay the outstanding rent within the stipulated time. The two-judge bench, comprising Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar, stated that the tenant's "obligation to pay the rent then in arrears before 21.03.2020 remained unfulfilled."

Subeesh, the petitioner, had been directed by the Rent Control Court in North Paravur to vacate the rented premises and surrender it to the landlord, Vichathran, due to unpaid arrears. Subeesh had appealed the decision, but the Rent Control Appellate Authority affirmed the lower court's ruling.

"The object of the provisions of Section 12(1) of the Act is to deny the defaulting tenant the right to contest the application for eviction," Justice P.G. Ajithkumar observed, underlining that the obligation to pay rent is not merely dependent on court orders but is statutory.

In a detailed order, the court also cited previous decisions, highlighting that "the principles of natural justice would mandate that the Rent Control Court or the Appellate Authority should afford such an opportunity to the tenant before passing an order under Section 12(3)."

Despite multiple opportunities and court orders, Subeesh failed to pay the complete arrears by the specified deadline. Even after being granted additional time by the court, Subeesh paid only a portion of the due amount, thus "failing to fulfill his statutory obligations."

Upholding the decision of the lower courts, the High Court stated, "His obligation to pay the rent then in arrears before 21.03.2020 as per the judgment in O.P.(RC) No.28 of 2020 remained unfulfilled." With this, the Court effectively sealed the tenant's fate, affirming his eviction.

The case serves as a stern reminder to tenants about the legal repercussions of not adhering to rent agreements and court orders.

Date of Decision: 12 September 2023

SUBEESH vs VICHATHRAN

Similar News