In Brief
A landlord sought eviction of a shop tenant under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act for non-payment of rent and house tax. The tenant disputed the rent amount and questioned the registrability of the rent note. The High Court upheld the tenant's objection that the rent note required compulsory registration under the Registration Act. The Supreme Court held that a monthly tenancy with no specified period, even if it included a clause for 10% annual rent increase, does not require compulsory registration and is merely a monthly tenancy. The Appellate Court erred in setting aside the eviction decree without finding that the tenant had cured the default or deposited requisite amounts. The Court allowed the appeal and restored the eviction decree.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.