Disposed

Allahabad Bank and 2 Others v. Arun Kumar Chirania and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 May 2018SCCR/48/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision against a suit decreeing eviction, the High Court increased monthly rent to Rs. 20,000, extended the eviction period until 17.11.2018, and directed the landlord to restore electricity supply.

What did the court decide?

Directs payment of Rs. 20,000/month as rent/damages from 01.04.2018; extends vacancy deadline to 17.11.2018; directs landlord to restore electricity within three days.

Allahabad Bank and 2 Others Vs Arun Kumar Chirania and… — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 26

¶2

Case :- S.C.C. REVISION No. - 48 of 2018

¶3

Revisionist :- Allahabad Bank And 2 Others Opposite Party :- Arun Kumar Chirania And 3 Others

¶4

Counsel for Revisionist :- Tarun Varma,Habib Ahmad

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.

¶6

(ORAL)

¶7

This revision has been filed by the Bank against the judgment and order dated 30.01.2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court No. 1, Sant Kabir Nagar in SCC Suit No. 1 of 2016.

¶8

After arguing for some time, Mr. Tarun Varma, learned counsel for the revisionists fairly admits that there is no legal or factual infirmity in the order impugned, but he prays for some reasonable time to vacate the premises in question as the respondent is a Bank and despite advertisement being issued for alternative accommodation, it has yet to find suitable accommodation as per the guidelines set by the Reserve Bank of India.

¶9

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned counsel appears

¶10

for the respondent and he says that the learned

¶11

court below has already given sufficient time of two months to vacate the premises. Even after two months when the vacant possession of the building was not delivered to the landlord and there was no interim order staying the operation of the judgment and order dated 30.01.2018, the landlord has filed Execution Case No. 23 of 2018, which was last listed on 11.04.2018, and the counsel for the Bank has sought adjournment before the Executing Court.

¶12

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondent also submits that as per the Rent Agreement entered into between the parties in 2005, regarding the property, which is 2500 Sq.Ft. situated in main Market at Nagar Palika, Khalilabad, district Sant Kabir Nagar, the rent was determined as Rs. 9107/- with a condition in the Agreement that the same shall be increased by 15 % after every five years. Such an increase was indeed effected in 2010 and the rent determined was Rs. 10,973/-. The condition of the lease was that it shall be renewed for two consecutive periods of five years. The last such period came to an end in 2015, and thereafter notice under

¶13

section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was given to vacate the premises, but the vacant possession of the property in question was not given. Hence, the SCC Suit was filed, which has been decreed on 30.01.2018 by the Competent Court.

¶14

On a perusal of the judgment and order dated 30.01.2018, this Court finds that the learned Trial Court has directed the Bank to vacate the premises within two months and also to tender arrears of rent w.e.f. July, 2015 to January, 2017 at the rate of Rs. 10473/- i.e. a total of Rs. 73,311/and also to pay Rs. 15,000/- as rent/damages till the vacant possession is given.

¶15

Mr. Tarun Varma, learned counsel for the revisionist says that the arrears of rent have already been paid and the Bank is continuing to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month as directed by the learned Trial Court. However, because of the influence exercised by the landlord, the electricity of the Bank premises has been disconnected and the Bank is facing a lot of problems in running its operations.

¶16

Mr. Tarun Varma, learned counsel for the revisionist prays that if this Court thinks it proper, it may increase the rent to Rs. 20,000/- per month and the Bank shall continue to pay the same month to month within seven days of its accrual w.e.f. 01.04.2018. It is his request that this Court may given atleast six months time to vacate the premises in question as the search for alternative accommodation is still continuing.

¶17

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the revisionist to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month as rent/damages w.e.f. 01.04.2018 for a period of six months and deliver vacant possession peacefully and without demur to the landlord on 17.11.2018. The money already tendered at the rate of Rs. 15000/- for the month of April and May shall be adjusted. The arrears as determined shall be tendered to the landlord within one week from today.

¶18

The landlord shall give a "No Objection Certificate" to the Bank with regard to its electricity connection being reconnected by the Electricity Department within three days from

¶19

today.

¶20

The Bank shall give an undertaking before the learned Trial Court that it shall vacate the premises latest by 17.11.2018. It is open for the Bank to vacate the said premises and deliver vacant possession peacefully to the landlord even before the last date fixed by this Court.

¶21

The Revision is disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 17.5.2018 Sazia

Allahabad Bank and 2 Others v. Arun Kumar Chirania and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Allahabad Bank and 2 Others v. Arun Kumar Chirania and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar Vs Rakesh Gupta

Brij Behari Lal and Others Vs Sona Devi and Another

U.P.S.R.T.C. Thru. R.M. Vs Sri Brijpal Singh and Others

Nirmal Kumar Jain and 2 Others Vs Sri Prakash Chand Jain and 2 Others

Sharad Kumar Gupta(Died) and 4 Others Vs Anil Sharma

Sri Thakur Sitaramji Maharaj VIRAJMAN,946,MUTTHIGANJ, Allahabad Vs Sri Om Prakash and 5 Others