AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 199 wordsG.C. Mittal, J.—I am in complete agreement with the Courts below that the condition contained in the lease deed that in case the premises is not vacated by the tenant on the expiry of six years voluntarily, he would be liable to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- instead of Rs. 500/- per month, is penal and in any case is hit by section (sic) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. The precise words in the lease deed are to the following effect:
That if the tenant does not return the possession of the premises to the landlord after the expiry of the fixed tenure of six years, he would be liable to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per month.
As already noticed the agreed rent was Rs. 500/- per month. The aforesaid condition imposed is clearly contrary to Section 7 of the Act.
I am not in agreement with Sh. R.L. Sarin appearing for the landlord that Rs. 2,080/- can be said to be the agreed rent either on the facts and circumstances of this case or within the meaning of Section 7(1) of the Act.
Dismissed.