MANMOHAN KAUR versus SURYA KANT BHAGWANDI

MANMOHAN KAUR versus SURYA KANT BHAGWANDI

Where delay in depositing rent under Section 13 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 is properly explained and not due to willful default, the court has discretion not to strike out the tenant's defence. Only in cases of unexplained or unjustified delay is striking out mandatory. In the present case, the delay was justified and properly explained; thus, the striking out of the defence was a miscarriage of justice.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Manmohan Kaur; Respondent/plaintiff: Surya Kant Bhagwandi
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 October 1988
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision Affirming Trial Court's Order Striking Out Defence in Eviction Suit
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Eviction, Striking Off Defence, Tenant's Delay in Rent Deposit, Court's Discretion for Delay
Landlord Tenant Law Eviction Striking Off Defence Tenant's Delay in Rent Deposit Court's Discretion for Delay

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manmohan Kaur

Appellant/defendant

Surya Kant Bhagwandi

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision Affirming Trial Court's Order Striking Out Defence in Eviction Suit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defence against ejectment can be struck off under Section 13 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 for failure to deposit rent within stipulated time when delay is satisfactorily explained
  2. 2 Whether court possesses discretion to excuse delay in such deposits

Ratio Decidendi

Where delay in depositing rent under Section 13 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 is properly explained and not due to willful default, the court has discretion not to strike out the tenant's defence. Only in cases of unexplained or unjustified delay is striking out mandatory. In the present case, the delay was justified and properly explained; thus, the striking out of the defence was a miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Orders of the High Court and Trial Court striking out the defence are set aside.
  • Defence of the appellant is restored.