Real Property Dispute Regarding Unpaid Rent and Court Jurisdiction
The Plaintiff and Defendant both reside in Ratchaburi Province. They entered into a lease agreement at Ratchaburi Province, with the Plaintiff leasing a house of the Plaintiff located in Chetumphon District, Bangkok Metropolitan, for the Defendant’s residence. It was agreed that the Defendant would pay the rent to the Plaintiff upon leaving the rented house. The Defendant and his associates refused to vacate the premises. Consequently, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit to recover unpaid rent. The Defendant and his associates presented an alibi to the Mueang District Court stating that the Defendant and his associates had moved their assets out of the rented house fifteen days before the lawsuit was filed. The Mueang District Court found no jurisdiction to order the payment of unpaid rent because the cause of action for the unpaid rent did not arise within the court’s jurisdiction, and the Defendant did not reside within the court’s jurisdiction. The Court examined the Plaintiff and found that the Defendant owned the disputed property prior to the fifteen-day period before the lawsuit was filed. The question is whether the Defendant’s aforementioned defense will be received in evidence.
This eviction case is a case concerning real property, pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Civil Procedure Code. The lawsuit for the recovery of unpaid rent is not a case concerning real property because it does not involve an interest in real property specifically. To bring a claim regarding this type of rent, one must file suit in the court where the Defendant resides or where the cause of action arose, pursuant to Section 4(1) of the Civil Procedure Code.
The Mueang District Court accepted the lawsuit due to the cause of action under the Civil Procedure Code, Section 4(1). Although the facts presented showed that the Defendant had vacated the Plaintiff’s eviction premises, which effectively deprived the Plaintiff of the right to file an eviction lawsuit, this was due to the fact that the Plaintiff had not moved out of the rented house prior to the lawsuit and the Plaintiff had received the lawsuit for consideration, exceeding the time limit to order it dismissed or returned.
Pursuant to Section 18 of the Civil Procedure Code, the court with jurisdiction must proceed with the eviction case. Therefore, the Mueang District Court must continue to process the proceedings and consider ordering a judgment regarding the court’s jurisdiction.