Not vacating the rented shop proved costly for the tenant. In one case, the Delhi High Court ordered a tenant to pay approximately Rs. 24.29 lakhs was ordered to be paid. The tenant claimed that he had given Rs 10 lakh cash to the landlords as a security deposit and would not vacate the shop until he got the money back. But he could not prove this payment in court.
This case shows that merely stating one’s claim is not enough in a rental property dispute. Documents such as rental agreements, payment receipts and bank transactions play an important role in strengthening your legal position. Let’s understand what the case is all about, what the High Court said and what lessons tenants and landlords learn from it.
What is the whole matter?
According to an ET report, a tenant living in Delhi’s Tilak Nagar had rented a shop measuring around 238.38 square feet from a Janakpuri couple in 2014. The initial rent was Rs 25,500 per month. The rental agreements were made for a period of 11 months, but were not registered.
According to the tenant, between November 2016 and March 2017, he gave Rs 10 lakh as cash security deposit to the landlords. He claimed that in exchange of this amount the monthly rent was reduced to Rs. 2,900 was made.
On the other hand, the building owners rejected this claim. He said that earlier the rent was Rs. 25,500 and increased in the year 2018 to Rs. 29,000 per month was made.
The dispute escalated when the lease agreement signed in 2018 expired on July 31, 2019. The landlord asked the tenant to vacate the shop, but he allegedly refused to vacate the shop until he got back Rs 10 lakh. Finally the matter reached the court.
Tenancy Rs. Why the claim of 10 lakhs weakened?
The most important question in the case was whether the tenant could actually prove that he had paid the security deposit of Rs 10 lakh and in return the rent was reduced to Rs 2,900. Her claim faced several problems in court:
- No proof of payment: Tenant Rs. 10 lakhs in cash could not be produced to support his claim of giving any solid receipt or sufficient documents.
- Rental agreement not presented: He admitted that he had entered into rental agreements in different years, but did not produce all the relevant documents in court.
- Disputes regarding Rent: Tenant Rs. 29,000 objected to the claim of monthly rent and said that the rent was Rs. 2,900 is But there is not enough evidence to prove this alternative arrangement.
- Contradictions in Testimony: The tenant’s mother also denied payment of part of the alleged amount during her testimony, which amounted to Rs. Questions were raised on the claim of 10 lakhs.
Thus, there was insufficient evidence before the court to prove the contention of the tenant on the basis of which he was refusing to vacate the shop.
What did the Delhi High Court order?
The Delhi High Court, in its order dated September 28, 2026, directed to vacate the shop and compensate the landlords for the period of unauthorized occupation. According to the report, the court imposed Rs. per month for unauthorized business. 25,500 has fixed Mesne profit i.e. compensation in lieu of use and possession. An increase of 15 percent every three years was also implemented. The ET report estimates that if the shop had been vacated in September 2026, the total amount payable would have been around Rs. 24.29 lakh could have been done. Keep in mind, this is an estimate given in media reports, and not an independently verified final account of the exact amount of ₹24.29 lakh. This amount can be completely different.
