KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present suit, the plaintiff seeks money decree for Rs. 21,35,984/- and a further decree for Rs. 3,18,750/- with effect from 01.12.2008.

(2.) The facts which are not in dispute are described as follows. The plaintiff leased-out the premises, being CGF-1, 2, 3 and 4, Ground Floor, C-Block, Dilkhush Industrial Estate, G.T. Karnal Road, Delhi (hereafter referred to as "the suit premises") to the defendants through a registered Deed dated 09.05.2008. The premises measure 3700 sq. feet and the lease was with effect from 01.05.2008. The total term of the lease was agreed to be 12 years, renewable at the end of the first three year term, at the option of the lessee, with increase of 15% rent upon the expiry of three years. The defendants paid Rs. 2,92,485/- by a cheque dated 13.06.2008 towards monthly rental for May 2008 after deducting the tax, at source. It is contended that while the defendants were in possession of the suit premises, a frivolous suit was filed by one Smt. Arvinder Kaur before the Civil Judge, being Suit No. 436/2008, seeking permanent injunction restraining the plaintiff and the first defendant (hereafter referred to as "the LIC") from entering into a tenancy. The injunction was refused. The suit was later withdrawn on 11.09.2008 and a fresh proceeding, being CS (OS) 2104/2008 was instituted before this Court, seeking cancellation of title documents, inuring in favor of the plaintiff.

(3.) The plaintiff contends that the LIC was free to use and enjoy the suit premises in terms of the lease deed. It is further alleged that the LIC has been defaulting in the discharge of its contractual obligations and has not paid rents after the initial payment of Rs. 2,92,485/-. The plaintiff adverts to a written notice to the LIC dated 23.08.2008 as well as a legal notice dated 08.11.2008 demanding payment of rentals after 01.06.2008. It is submitted that the defendants have refused to make the payments on frivolous grounds, i.e. pendancy of Smt. Arvinder Kaur's suit before the Court, alleging cloud on the title to the leased premises. The plaintiff submits that such excuse is impermissible and, therefore, claims the reliefs sought for in the present case.