Tenants Who Default on Rent Cannot Seek Eviction Protection: Kerala High Court

In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has held that a tenant who has defaulted on paying rent cannot approach the court seeking protection from eviction proceedings. The judgment, delivered by Justice C. Jayachandran, emphasizes that a landlord holds paramount title over the tenanted property, and the tenant’s right to remain in occupation is conditional upon their obligation to pay rent.

Calling the practice of tenants approaching courts for protection without paying rent a “disquieting litigative trend,” Justice Jayachandran reiterated that the tenant’s right to possession is entirely dependent on fulfilling their rental obligations. The court remarked that allowing tenants to misuse legal proceedings against eviction would be not only “oppressive” but also amount to “harassment of the landlord” who would have to tolerate a tenant without receiving rent.

Court’s Observations and Reasoning

The court made strong observations regarding tenants who seek relief while failing to meet their basic obligation to pay rent. Justice Jayachandran asked:

“If the tenant chooses to approach a court of law, that too seeking an equitable relief of protection from eviction, without performing the above vital obligation, is not such a proceeding an abuse of the process of the court? Will it not amount to improper use and perversion of the process of the court? Will not the adversary/tenant, through unfounded use of a legal proceeding, obtain an unfair advantage over his opponent/landlord? Is not such a proceeding – wholly bereft of any bonafides – oppressive and vexatious and liable to be aborted to prevent miscarriage of justice?”

Guidelines Issued by the Court

To address this issue and ensure fairness, the Kerala High Court issued the following guidelines for future cases where tenants approach courts for protection from eviction:

• Mandatory Affidavit: The tenant seeking an injunction against forcible eviction must submit an affidavit with the plaint, swearing that the rent due up to the month preceding the filing of the plaint has been paid and will continue to be paid during the litigation.
• Non-Payment Explanation: In cases where rent is not paid, the tenant must explain in the affidavit the reasons for such non-payment.
• Ex-Parte Orders: If the tenant’s affidavit confirms that rent has been regularly paid, courts should generally grant an ex-parte ad-interim order restraining eviction. If the rent is not paid, the court will review the reasons before issuing any orders.
• Landlord’s Challenge: Upon the landlord entering the proceedings, if it is shown that the tenant has not paid rent contrary to their affidavit, the court will order the tenant to deposit arrears within a specific time frame.
• Consequences of Non-Compliance: If the tenant fails to deposit the arrears as directed by the court, the interim injunction will be vacated. If arrears are paid within the given time, the injunction will be reinstated, provided the tenant agrees to continue paying rent.
• Striking Off Pleadings: If the tenant does not deposit the arrears within the given time, the court may strike off the tenant’s pleadings.

General Guidelines Subject to Discretion

While these guidelines serve as a general framework, the court clarified that it retains the discretion to deviate based on the individual facts and circumstances of each case. The intention is to ensure fairness and prevent the misuse of legal proceedings, while protecting the legitimate interests of both landlords and tenants.

Click to Read: Pramod v The Secretary, The Sultanpet Diocese Society and Another