Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Madan Mohan Agarwal And Others v. Girish Kumar Chaturvedi And Others - WRIT - A No. 14780 of 2003 [2006] RD-AH 17542 (11 October 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


   Court no. 7                                                        

         Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14780 of 2003

Madan Mohan Agarwal and others      versus     Girish Kumar Chaturvedi

                                                                             and others.

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari,J.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Brief facts of the case are that respondent- landlords filed an application under Section 21(1-A) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release of the accommodation in dispute consisting of 5 rooms and one big hall situate in Mohalla Chhata Bazar, District Mathura of which the petitioners are the tenants on monthly rent of Rs.250/-.

The petitioner-tenants filed their written statement denying the allegations made in the aforesaid release application.

The trial Court vide order dated 13.9.1996 rejected the release application of the respondent-landlords.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 13.9.1996 the respondents went up in appeal. The appellate Court vide its judgment and order dated 7.2.2003 allowed the appeal of the respondents, hence this writ petition,

The counsel for respondents submits the petitioners are tenant in the disputed accommodation on monthly rent of Rs.250/- and prays that the rent of the disputed accommodation is too low. He prays that in the circumstances either the rent of the disputed accommodation may be increased suitably.

       The counsel for the petitioners submits that in case the petitioners are evicted from the disputed accommodation they will suffer irreparable loss and injury and the case for enhancement of the rent may be considered.

The petitioners are tenant of the disputed accommodation consisting of 5 rooms and one big hall situate in Mohalla Chhata Bazar, District Mathura on monthly rent of Rs. 250/-.  The rent of Rs. 250/- per month in respect of the aforesaid accommodation in question appears to be inadequate rent for the accommodation in dispute.  A pragmatic approach has to be taken considering the location and rate of rent prevailing in the locality etc. With passage of time value of house rent has increased and as such it has to be proportionately increased in addition to notional increase of 10% in rent every 5 years as provided under Act No. XIII of 1972.

   It is not the case of the tenants that no accommodation is available to them on rent per contra their case is that no accommodation is available on the rent, which they are paying at present to the landlords.

 The writ Court can enhance the rent to a reasonable extent as has been held in Rajeshwari  (Smt.) Vs. Smt. Prema Agarwal, 2005(1) ARC-526, Hari Mohan Kichlu Vs. VIIIth A.D.J. Muzaffarnagar and others, 2004 (2) ARC-652 and Khurshida Vs. A.D.J. 2004(2) ARC-64.

   Taking a pragmatic approach, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and location/area of the shop etc. it would be appropriate that the rent of the disputed accommodation now be increased to Rs. 7,500/- per month (Rs. 1200/-per month for each room i.e. for five rooms Rs. 1200x 5= Rs.6, 000/- and Rs. 1500/- per month for one big hall, total Rs. 7500/- per month) from October, 2006. It is accordingly directed that the tenant shall pay a sum of Rs. 7500/- per month towards rent to the landlord till further orders which shall be payable to the landlord by 7th day of each succeeding month. The rent fixed by this Court shall be increased 10% every 5 years till further orders according to the provisions of the Act.

In case of default in payment of the arrears of rent, if any and current rent as directed by this Court the landlords can get the disputed accommodation vacated with the help of police within a period of one month by giving notice in writing.

        List in the month of March, 2007.

Dated 11.10.2006





Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.