The Al Ain Civil and Administrative Court has ruled that a representative of a property owner must refund AED 115,000 to a tenant.

The court determined that this amount was unlawfully collected as rental payment without proper legal justification.

In the proceedings, a woman filed a lawsuit against a man, demanding the return of AED 115,000, along with 5% legal interest, court fees, and attorney's fees.

She claimed that she had handed the specified amount to the defendant, who represented himself as the agent of her landlord.

However, she was later surprised to receive further claims for the rental amount from the actual property owner.

Upon attempting to recover her payment from the defendant, she reported that he refused to return the funds.

The defendant submitted a response requesting the inclusion of the landlord’s heirs in the case and ultimately asked for the lawsuit to be dismissed.

During the court hearing, the defendant acknowledged receiving AED 115,000 from the plaintiff, claiming that the funds were deposited in the heirs' account.

He indicated that the tenancy agreement was between the claimant and the first defendant, who was identified as the landlord's heir.

Testimony from the second defendant revealed that the initial accused received the rental payment through checks written in his name, asserting he was merely acting on behalf of the property owner and the heirs under an informal rental contract that had since been terminated.

The judge sought to mediate a settlement between the parties, but the plaintiff declined the offer.

The defendant admitted to receiving the payment and transferring it to the owner, who subsequently refused to establish a new rental agreement.

The court accepted the motion to include the heirs in the case, concluding that the defendant had formally acknowledged receiving AED 115,000 from the plaintiff for the rental property.

However, he failed to provide proof of his authority to collect this amount, particularly as the contract linking him with the first defendant was only valid for one year and had expired.

Consequently, the court ruled that the defendant had collected the amount without any legal reason, ordering him to refund the AED 115,000 and granting him the right to seek reimbursement from the involved parties if applicable.

The court accepted the ancillary request in form but rejected it substantively, ordering the defendant to pay the stated amount to the plaintiff and condemning him to bear the related expenses, while dismissing all other claims.