Expired lease and rent default justified vacant possession, arrears, and damages for unlawful occupation, with future mesne profits refused.

A fixed-term lease had expired, rent had remained unpaid from July 2021, and the termination notice was duly served; on those facts, the Madras HC held the plaintiff entitled to vacant possession and rental arrears, rejecting the tenant's objection based on the extent of the property. After termination, continued occupation without clearing arrears constituted unlawful use and occupation, so damages, GST and future interest were awarded. The court refused future mesne profits for want of basis and declined costs and other further reliefs.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the plaintiff was entitled to vacant possession of the schedule property and rental arrears on the basis of the lease deed and the tenant's default; (ii) Whether the plaintiff was entitled to damages for unlawful use and occupation, GST, future interest, future mesne profits, costs, and other reliefs.

Issue (i): Whether the plaintiff was entitled to vacant possession of the schedule property and rental arrears on the basis of the lease deed and the tenant's default.

Analysis: The lease was for a fixed term of five years and had expired. The evidence showed default in payment of rent from July 2021, and the defendant admitted in cross-examination that rent had not been paid from August 2021. The termination notice was held to have been duly served. The court also rejected the contention that the extent of the property defeated the claim, as the defendant had agreed to pay the rent fixed in the agreement and failed to prove payment of arrears.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was held entitled to vacant possession and rental arrears.

Issue (ii): Whether the plaintiff was entitled to damages for unlawful use and occupation, GST, future interest, future mesne profits, costs, and other reliefs.

Analysis: After termination of the tenancy, the defendant continued in occupation without clearing the arrears and remained in unlawful possession. On that basis, the court granted damages for unlawful use and occupation, GST, and future interest on the principal sums. However, the claim for future mesne profits was rejected as being without basis. The court also declined to award costs and other further reliefs.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was held entitled to damages, GST, and future interest, but not to future mesne profits, costs, or other reliefs.

Final Conclusion: The suit succeeded substantially, with eviction and monetary reliefs granted in part, while the claim for future mesne profits and costs was refused.

---