Appellate Division
Md. Mamun Akhter Hossain v Md. Haider Ali Sarker and another
Civil Appeal 96/2016 · Appeal allowed; trial court decree restored · Decided 21 May 2025
The appellant landlord sued in the Small Causes Court, Bogra to evict defendant No. 1 from a shop, alleging default in rent and personal need. The shop had been let to defendant No. 2, who later transferred possession to defendant No. 1 on receipt of a salami of Tk 2,25,000. Defendant No. 1 claimed that he paid rent regularly and, when the landlord refused it, deposited it with the House Rent Controller. The trial court decreed the suit, finding him a defaulter. In revision the High Court Division made the Rule absolute, holding that he was not a defaulter because the salami or advance could be adjusted against rent. On appeal by leave, the Appellate Division held that salami is prohibited by section 10 of the Premises Rent Control Act, confers no right of possession and cannot be treated as advance rent, and that later tender or deposit does not cure a default. It allowed the appeal and restored the trial court's decree.
- Whether salami or lump-sum money paid for possession of rented premises can be adjusted against rent so as to negate the tenant's default.
- Whether the High Court Division was right to reverse the trial court's finding that the defendant was a defaulter.
- Payment of salami or advance money for possession of rented premises is prohibited by section 10 of the Premises Rent Control Act and confers no legal right of possession on the tenant.
- Acceptance of salami does not create a non-ejectable right in the tenant, who is entitled only to its refund under section 14, and the illegality of the transaction cannot shield the tenant from eviction for default (Mustaque Hossain v Md. Shajahan Miah, 57 DLR (AD) 60).
- Once a tenant is in default, a subsequent tender or deposit of rent does not cure the default, and the protection of section 18(5) is available only to a tenant who pays or deposits rent regularly in accordance with law.
- Payment of rent in a lump sum does not protect a tenant from default unless covered by a specific contract or waiver by the landlord, so the High Court Division misdirected itself in treating the salami as advance rent.
The Trial Court also rightly noted that payment of any salami or advance money for possession of rented premises is prohibited by Section 10 of the Act and does not confer any legal right of possession upon the tenant.
