breach of agreement by landlord, court allows correction in rent agreement after seven years!
R. Shanmuganathan
(Querist) 01 July 2011
This query is : Resolved
Dear Sir,
We have been a tenant since 1961 running two shops next-to-next (in a row of 7 shops)in the ground floor. In 1997, the landlord approached us and requested us to vacate the shops so that a new construction of a new commercial complex could be made (total of about 10,000 sq.ft area). So, an agreement was signed in which the landlord mentioned that our shops will be in the first floor (4-1/2 feet from the road level). When we asked about the floor underneath it, he said it was allocated for parking. But when the construction was made, he not only raised the height of our floor to about 8 feet but he also constructed shops only in the basement. When we opposed to the height of our floor, he agreed to give us the shops just below in the basement. But as it was not completed, he asked us to occupy the first floor shops temporarily (as Deepawali was nearing so that we can run some business) and he assured us to hand over the basement shops as soon as it is completed. But, he did not gave the basement shops to us but he gave the shops to a new person accepting Rs. 8,00,000 as T-money. Meanwhile, the height of the floor affected our business totally. In 2004, the landlord filed an RCOP case against us praying for a direction to us to pay the rent arrears and vacate the premises. We argued in the court that he (landlord) cheated us and has not given us the "basement, ground floor" (as quoted in the rent agreement) and we are not in the "basement, ground floor" but we are only in the first floor (about 8 feet from the road level), so this agreement would not bind us and there is no landlord-tenant relationship exists. The landlord, realizing his mistake, applied for a correction to be made in the rent agreement to the effect that the words "basement, ground floor" be changed to ground floor. In spite of our strong opposition, the court allowed the correction. Even if the allowing of correction by the court is correct, how can a level of 8 feet from ground level be called a ground floor? Actually, there is no ground floor in that building at all. But, the court ruled finally that we pay the arrears and continue to be the tenant, otherwise vacate. We appealed in the higher court and they also confirmed the judgement. We appealed in High Court and they dismissed our appeal. All the three courts have not cared to the cheating done to us by the landlord and had not cared to verify our contention or the fact that is there any ground floor in the building at all? We are paying rent to the shops in a floor that is actually nonexistent in that complex. Kindly advise what further steps we can take? We are not running the shops since 1996. My question is, Is the landlord has the authority to demand from us rent based on this rent agreement? Is it right for the court to allow a correction in a rent agreement after seven years (after the landlord went to the court)? If the court can allow a correction in a main document after seven years, why cannot it entertain or heed our pleas and contentions being cheated by our landlord? Are we bound by the rent agreement at all? Can we claim compensation from the landlord for the damage done to us due to his breach of agreement? Is it advisable to apply for a revision in the High Court? Would you advise us to go to the Supreme Court? Please advise!
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 01 July 2011
Make a petition Under 142 of the Constitution and then approach Supreme Court seeking complete justice.
Your problem will be solved.
R. Shanmuganathan
(Querist) 02 July 2011
Dear Sir,
Thank you very much for having spent your time upon our issue and for your valuable advice which is certainly a ray or hope for us! Kindly inform me your e-mail ID please!
Thank you very much sir,
Yours sincerely,
R. Shanmuganathan
dev kapoor
(Expert) 02 July 2011
There are some ambiguities in the question i.e. (1) Which state do you belong to ?It is important o know the Rent/Eviction Laws of that particular stater & (ii) which type of suit did you file.In my humbler opinion you ought to have filed a suit for Specific Performance of contract so that the landlord could be forced to do his part of the contract i.e to rent you(replace,of course) a tenement as per the contract.AND if the contract could not be performed due to reasons beyond his control (as you said there is no shop at the ground floor) in that case he is bound to lease out a shop to you at any floor that is equivalent to GF.
Now,there is some doubt whether you can file a fresh suit in view of O:2,R@ CPC or not.Seek advice of a good CIVIL LAWYER.You can take the plea of 'wrong advice by advocate' if available for a renewed civil action. Good luck.