Law Maker

Section 9: Rent which should not have been paid may be recovered

The Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987

How current this text is

Text as published by the Law Department, Government of Himachal Pradesh, with amendments up to H.P. Act No. 8 of 2012.

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Chaman Lal Bali v. State of Himachal Pradesh (CWP No. 2072 of 1995, decided on 2 August 2016, reported as AIR 2016 HP 168) is reported to have declared section 4 unconstitutional, together with sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 30(2) in so far as they depend on standard rent fixed under section 4. The official text still prints these provisions. We could not open the judgment on an official court site and found no order of the Supreme Court staying or reversing it.

H.P. Ordinance No. 4 of 2022, promulgated on 12 October 2022, amended section 14. No Act replacing it has been found, and an Ordinance that is not replaced by an Act ceases to operate, so this text does not show it.

Where any sum has been paid which sum is by reason of the provisions of this Act not payable, such sum shall, at any time within a period of one year after the date of the payment, or in the case of payment made before the commencement of this Act within one year after the appointed day, be recoverable by the tenant by whom it was paid or his legal representative from the landlord who received the payment or his legal representative, and may, without prejudice to any other method of recovery, be deducted by such tenant from any rent payable within such one year by him to such landlord.

Explanation.- In this section, the expression “legal representative” has the same meaning as assigned to it in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) and includes also, in the case of joint family property the joint family of which the deceased was a member.

Questions on this section

1 question in 1 of our papers cite Section 9.