Court Rules Tenants Must Deposit Rent in Court of Pending Eviction Suit, Not Under Section
In a landmark judgment, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, has clarified the legal position regarding the deposit of rent by tenants during ongoing eviction proceedings. The court dismissed a petition filed by Smt. Ram Dulari and others, who sought to challenge the rejection of their plea to deposit rent under Section 30 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent, and Eviction) Act, 1972. The ruling underscores the necessity for tenants to deposit rent in the court handling the eviction suit, as governed by Order XV Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), rather than invoking Section 30 once litigation has commenced.
The case involved a scenario where the petitioners, tenants of a property in Moradabad, attempted to deposit rent under Section 30 after the landlord, Harshit Yadav, refused to accept rent payments. However, the eviction suit filed by the landlord was already pending in the Small Causes Court, Moradabad. The civil judge and the Additional District Judge had previously rejected the petitioners' application under Section 30, prompting the appeal to the High Court.
The court highlighted that Section 30 serves as a pre-litigation mechanism allowing tenants to deposit rent if the landlord refuses to accept it or if there's a bona fide dispute about the rightful recipient of the rent. However, once eviction proceedings are initiated, this provision becomes inapplicable. The tenant's obligation to deposit rent shifts to the court handling the eviction case, ensuring adherence to procedural laws and maintaining judicial oversight.
The judgment also referenced the case of Haider Abbas v. Additional District Judge, which emphasized the distinction between pre-litigation deposits under Section 30 and deposits required during ongoing litigation. The court reiterated that once a suit is filed, tenants must deposit rent as per the court's directives, and any deposits under Section 30 during litigation hold no legal consequence.
The court dismissed the petition, affirming that the petitioners' reliance on Section 30 was misplaced given the pendency of the eviction suit. The ruling reinforces the principle that procedural compliance in eviction suits is paramount, and tenants must adhere to court directives to avoid default consequences.
Bottom Line:
Section 30 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent, and Eviction) Act, 1972 is a protective provision enabling tenants to deposit rent in specific circumstances prior to litigation. Once eviction proceedings are instituted, the tenant must deposit rent in the court handling the suit under Order XV Rule 5 CPC.
Statutory provision(s):
U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent, and Eviction) Act, 1972 Section 30, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order XV Rule 5, Article 227 of the Constitution of India
Smt Ram Dulari v. Harshit Yadav, (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2874732
