Premium
This is an archive article published on June 4, 2008

SC: don’t hike rent arbitrarily

The Supreme Court has said that courts, including the high courts, should desist from issuing any directions that can lead to either revising or increasing the rent...

.

The Supreme Court has said that courts, including the high courts, should desist from issuing any directions that can lead to either revising or increasing the rent to be paid by the tenants. Assailing such directions given by the courts as “unreasonable and arbitrary”, a Bench comprising Justices R V Raveendran and Lokeshwar Singh Panta explained as to how courts must deal with petitions filed by landlords against rejection of their eviction petitions and those filed by tenants against the grant of eviction.

“In writ petitions filed by a landlord against rejection of eviction petitions, there is no scope for the issue of any interim direction to the tenant to pay higher rent,” said the Bench, while setting aside one such order where the HC had increased the rent by 48 times.

While in the former case, the courts may desist from issuing any interim direction, in the latter, the apex court said that “the high court may, as a condition of stay, direct the tenant to pay a higher rent during the pendency of the writ petition”, but only subject to two limitations.

Story continues below this ad

“First, the condition imposed should be reasonable. Second, there should not be any bar in the respective state rent control legislation with regard to such an increase in the rent,” it said, while reprimanding the Allahabad High Court, which during the pendency of a petition filed by a landlord ordered the tenant to pay “an arbitrarily assessed rent”.

Aggrieved by the HC order, dated October 17, 2006, wherein he was asked to pay rent at the rate of Rs 12,050 per month from the same month, the tenant moved the apex court. Earlier, he was paying Rs 250 per month, as agreed by the landlord and him.

“Adopting some arbitrary figure as prevailing market rent without any basis and directing the tenant to pay absurdly high rent would be considered oppressive and unreasonable even when such direction is issued as a condition for stay of eviction. The high court should desist from doing so,” said the Bench. The apex court set aside the HC’s order of asking the tenant to pay the increased amount.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement