News To Fuse

Truth Is No More Hidden

Landlords Can Take Only One Month's Rent as Advance - Supreme Court

, , , , No comments

Tenants here can now breathe easy while house-owners have a tough task ahead as a city court has said that landlords renting out their premises can ask for only one month's rent as advance. 

A Chennai court, citing a previous precedence set by the Supreme Court of India, underlined that the landlord is lawfully entitled to only month's rent advance.

The XIII Small Causes Court cited the 1996 Supreme Court verdict: "The landlord is entitled to receive only one month's agreed rent by way of advance and any amount paid in excess of agreed rent shall be refunded or adjusted towards rent," while passing the order.

The court passed the ruling last week while hearing an eviction petition filed by a landlord under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.

The landlord, Niamuthullah, reportedly told the court that he had rented out his house to an advocate, Hariharan Rajan. The tenant, however, defaulted on the rent and electricity bills for 11 months (from 1, February, 2007 to 31, January, 2008). He said in his appeal that the tenant should be evicted on the basis of "wilful default".

The tenant, in his counter argument, told the court that he had paid Rs 25,000 as advance to the house owner. The problem began when Rajan tried to deposit the rent to the owner's bank account instead of paying cash. Following this, Rajan tried to pay the rent by money order, but the landlord refused.

The tenant argued that the house owner, in violation of the SC rule, collected more than one month's rent as advance and hence any pending amount should be adjusted from the advance.

Judge C Sasikumar, favouring Rajan's argument, said that the tenant had submitted the rental receipts as evidence, which shows that rent for May 2007 and July 2007 were not paid.

"The contention of Niamuthullah that (the advocate) had committed wilful default is not acceptable and the court comes to the conclusion that he had not committed wilful default. This petition deserves to be dismissed," said the judge. 
The verdict, however, attracted criticism from the legal fraternity. 

"Whittling down the advance amount to one month is impractical and unfair," said advocate Sanjay Pinto. 
Underlining that the rent control Act favoured tenants, he said the law had to be fair to tenants and house owners. 

Evicting a tenant for not paying rent was a cumbersome process and the only safeguard an owner had against default in rent and damage to property or fixtures by a tenant who is often a stranger is the rental advance.

Liked the post?? Share it now !!

No comments :

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )