Arrears of Rent

Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 -- Sufficient cause -- Ejectment –Tenant took plea in the written statement that his suit for declaration of occupancy rights in respect of the land had been decreed in his favour by the Assistant Collector and he was not liable to pay rent for the land as a tenant – On appeal by Owner of land, the Collector had remanded the case but the Assistant Collector again decreed the suit -- Owner of land filed an appeal before the Collector, who allowed the appeal  -- Thereafter, the tenant filed an appeal before the Commissioner, which was dismissed – Tenant then moved the Financial Commissioner in revision, which was also dismissed -- In the meanwhile, the tenant deposited the rent in the Treasury – Held, tenant did not pay rent for the land as he was pursuing his claim of occupancy rights in respect of the land and if his claim was finally allowed he would not be liable for rent -- The tenant had, therefore, sufficient cause for not paying the rent for the land and was not liable to be evicted under Section 9(1)(ii) of the 1953 Act. Subhash Chand v. State of Haryana & Ors., 2011(1) L.A.R. 363 (SC).

Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (10 of 1953) -- For ejectment of a tenant under the 1953 Act or for recovery of arrears of rent from a tenant, the procedure laid down in Section 14-A read with Section 10(2) of the Act has to be followed. Subhash Chand v. State of Haryana & Ors., 2011(1) L.A.R. 363 (SC).

Rent Act -- Assessment by Rent Controller – Extension of time –Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to extend the time to make deposit of the amount as assessed by the Rent Controller beyond the period already fixed by the Rent Controller while assessing the rent -- Tenant is bound to make payment, there is no question for extension of time. Sudhir Kumar v. Kuldip Singh Malhotra, 2011(1) L.A.R. 96 (P&H).

Rent Act -- Assessment of provisional rent -- Cheque was tendered, when it was presented by the landlord for the purpose of realization, it was dishonored by the Bank – Plea that there is an error on the part of Rent Controller in not assessing the exact amount, which is to be paid on the first date of hearing, can not be raised in this case -- Once there is a default on the part of the tenant of not depositing the provisional rent on due date as determined by the Rent Controller then the tenant is liable to vacate the demised premises and time cannot be extended in any case. Gurvinder Singh v. Vinayak Bahl, 2011(1) L.A.R. 668 (P&H).

Rent Act -- Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to order extension of time of payment of provisional rent by the tenant. Mrs. Birinder Khullar v. Maninder Singh, 2011(1) L.A.R. 496 (P&H).

Rent Act -- Whether the Rent Controller has jurisdiction to further extend time to tender rent in case of disagreement with the tenant on his application regarding re-assessment -- Held, even if it is assumed that the application for re-assessment was a review application, the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to grant further time to the tenant for tendering the provisional rent when he did not agree with him on his application for review -- In that circumstance, he was left with no other alternative but to simply dismiss the application. Mrs. Birinder Khullar v. Maninder Singh, 2011(1) L.A.R. 496 (P&H).