MAHENDRA KAUR ARORA versus HDFC BANK LTD

MAHENDRA KAUR ARORA versus HDFC BANK LTD

Clause 6 of the Deposit Agreement required the respondent to refund the deposit contemporaneous to removing itself and handing over vacant possession and giving charge to the lessor; the respondent did not follow that procedure and there is no record of steps calling upon the lessor to attend for handing over, therefore the Appellate Rent Tribunal's allowance of the Bank's counter-claim was unsustainable and the Rent Tribunal judgment in favour of the appellant is restored; however the Division Bench correctly held that an intra-court appeal against a Single Judge order under Article 227 is not maintainable.

Parties
Appellant Landlady: Mahendra Kaur Arora; Respondent: HDFC Bank Ltd
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court
Outcome
Civil Appeal No. 6096 of 2017 allowed; Civil Appeal No. 6097 of 2017 dismissed; Rent Tribunal judgment restored and decree in favour of the appellant upheld
Legal Topics
Lease Agreement, Security Deposit, Eviction, Use and Occupation Charges, Termination of Lease, Article 227, Intra Court Appeal Maintainability
Constitutional Law Property Law Contract Law Rent Law Civil Procedure Lease Agreement Security Deposit Eviction +4 more

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahendra Kaur Arora

Appellant Landlady

HDFC Bank Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lessee (respondent-Bank) was entitled to retain and continue occupying the premises and withhold refund of the security deposit until the lessor refunded the deposit in breach of clause 6 of the Deposit Agreement
  2. 2 Whether an intra-court appeal is maintainable against an order of a Single Judge on a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 6 of the Deposit Agreement required the respondent to refund the deposit contemporaneous to removing itself and handing over vacant possession and giving charge to the lessor; the respondent did not follow that procedure and there is no record of steps calling upon the lessor to attend for handing over, therefore the Appellate Rent Tribunal's allowance of the Bank's counter-claim was unsustainable and the Rent Tribunal judgment in favour of the appellant is restored; however the Division Bench correctly held that an intra-court appeal against a Single Judge order under Article 227 is not maintainable.

Court Disposition

Civil Appeal No. 6096 of 2017 allowed; Civil Appeal No. 6097 of 2017 dismissed; Rent Tribunal judgment restored and decree in favour of the appellant upheld

Orders

  • Civil Appeal No. 6096 of 2017 allowed
  • Civil Appeal No. 6097 of 2017 dismissed