In Brief
A landlady leased commercial premises to HDFC Bank for nine years at ₹28,625 per month. The Bank terminated the lease with three months' notice in May 2004 but continued occupying the premises until June 2006 without handing over vacant possession. The Bank claimed refund of a ₹85,875 security deposit with interest. The Supreme Court held that the Deposit Agreement required simultaneous handing over of possession and refund of the security deposit. Since the Bank failed to provide the landlady the opportunity to receive possession and return the deposit at the same time, her obligation to refund the deposit did not arise. Civil Appeal No. 6096 was allowed and the decree in the landlady's favour was restored.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.