MADAN MOHAN AND ANOTHER versus KRISHAN KUMAR SOOD

MADAN MOHAN AND ANOTHER versus KRISHAN KUMAR SOOD

The executing court and High Court have no power to extend or abridge the statutory period provided under Section 14 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 for deposit of arrears and other amounts, and once the conditions for eviction are satisfied and the statutory period lapses without compliance, eviction must follow. The Court clarified that 'amount due' includes not only arrears at the time of filing for eviction but also the rent accruing up to the date of the eviction order.

Parties
Appellant: Madan Mohan; Appellant: Another (Appellant No.2); Respondent: Krishan Kumar Sood
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 January 1993
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Eviction, Non Payment of Rent, Execution Proceedings, Extension of Time for Deposit, Interpretation of Statutes
Landlord and Tenant Rent Control Eviction Non Payment of Rent Execution Proceedings Extension of Time for Deposit Interpretation of Statutes

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Madan Mohan

Appellant

Another (Appellant No.2)

Appellant

Krishan Kumar Sood

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the executing court had jurisdiction to extend time for deposit of arrears as per Section 14 of Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987
  2. 2 What constitutes 'amount due' under Section 14(2)(i), third proviso
  3. 3 Whether the Rent Controller and High Court could go behind their own eviction order during execution proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The executing court and High Court have no power to extend or abridge the statutory period provided under Section 14 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 for deposit of arrears and other amounts, and once the conditions for eviction are satisfied and the statutory period lapses without compliance, eviction must follow. The Court clarified that 'amount due' includes not only arrears at the time of filing for eviction but also the rent accruing up to the date of the eviction order.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside High Court order dated 17th May, 1991 and Rent Controller order dated 18th May, 1990
  • Directed the Rent Controller, Shimla, to issue warrants of possession for ejectment of the respondent and place the landlords/appellants in possession