REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL Nos.16809-16810 OF 2017
(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.20226-20227/2017)
BHARAT DEEP SETHI
.. APPELLANT(S)
Versus
SONIA TAKKAR
.. RESPONDENT(S)
JUDGMENT
R. BANUMATHI,J.
1.
Leave granted.
2.
These appeals have been filed against the interim
impugned orders dated 21st July, 2017 in C.M.No.25602/2017 and
in RC.Review No.102/2017 dated 25th July, 2017, in and by
which the High Court directed the appellant-tenant to pay an
amount of Rs.1,25,000/- per month with effect from 7th June,
2017 till the end of the month July, 2017 and also continue to
pay the said amount to the respondent-landlord with effect
from the month of August, 2017.
3.
Brief facts are that virtue of an unregistered lease
deed executed on 13th March, 2000, the appellant-tenant is on
rent in the suit property being Shop No.1, situated on the
ground floor, 2/9 Roop Nagar, Delhi. The respondent-landlord
claims to have purchased the property by virtue of a
registered sale deed dated 07.02.2011 from the trust. The
respondent-landlord has filed the suit for eviction before the
learned Rent Controller for requirement of her son. The
appellants had filed an application seeking leave to defend on
the ground that there exists no landlord-tenant relationship.
By the order dated 28.06.2016 the Rent Controller dismissed
the application and declined leave to defend. Being
aggrieved, the appellant-tenant approached the High Court. By
the impugned order, the High Court has directed the
appellant-tenant to pay a sum of Rs.1.25 Lacs per month.
4.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at
length. It is pointed out by both parties that the High Court
has only passed an interim order and has not heard the parties
on merits and whether the appellant-tenant has got any triable
issue. The apellant-tenant is stated to be in occupation of
190 sq.ft on the ground floor of the suit property bearing No.
2/9 Roop Nagar, Delhi. According to the respondent-landlord,
the tenanted premises is prime commercial property which would
definitely fetch not less than Rs.2 lakhs per month. This is
refuted by the counsel appearing for the appellant-tenant and
submitted that the amount fixed at Rs.1.25 lacs is very much
on the higher side and an opportunity ought to have been given
to the appellant-tenant to contest the matter on merits.
5.
Without going into the merits of the rival
contentions, we direct the appellant-tenant to pay an amount
of Rs,40,000/- per month from the month of June, 2017,
towards use and occupation and the same shall be directly paid
to the respondent-landlord. The arrears at the rate of
Rs.40,000/- per month from June, 2017 shall be paid to the
respondent-landlord within a period of four weeks deducting
the amount already paid by the appellant-tenant to the
respondent-landlord. The appellant-tenant shall continue to
pay the rent at the rate of Rs.40,000/- to the
respondent-landlord.
6.
We are of the view that an opportunity should be
afforded to the appellant-tenant to raise all the contentions/
issues. The impugned orders dated 21.07.2017 and 25.07.2017
are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High
Court for consideration afresh. We request the High Court to
take up the main revision and dispose it of at an early date
preferably within three months from the date of receipt of
this order. The above order is passed without prejudice to
the contentions of the both parties and all the contentions
are left open. Till the matter is finally disposed of by the
High Court, no coercive steps shall be taken by the
respondent-landlord.
7.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
....................J.
[R. BANUMATHI]
....................J.
[S. ABDUL NAZEER]
NEW DELHI,
OCTOBER 12, 2017.