Delhi resident Sristy Choudhury said her landlady proposed deducting money from her security deposit after she removed barbed wire from the property’s entrance. In a video shared while she was leaving after a three-year tenancy, Choudhury also showed seepage and described the premises as neglected. Hindustan Times reported her account on October 1, 2026; its report does not establish whether any money was ultimately withheld.
Why did the landlady reportedly propose a deduction?
According to Hindustan Times, Choudhury said she had arranged bamboo structures herself and was removing them as she left. She said the landlady then told her the deposit would be reduced because she had taken out barbed wire from the entrance. Choudhury relayed the landlady’s alleged words: “What about our security? You took out the barbed wires from here. So now we are going to minus that from your security deposit.”
Choudhury said the gate needed to work as the entrance to her business and alleged that the landlords knew about and were involved in removing the wire. Those details are her account as reported by the outlet, not independently verified findings. The report does not include the lease or the landlady’s own account.
What condition did Choudhury show?
In the video described by Hindustan Times, Choudhury showed seepage and criticized the proposed deduction in light of the property’s condition. She characterized the premises as neglected and said it had been rundown and unused for years. The report does not identify an independent inspection or establish the property’s history.
#1 Best Overall
Hindustan Times quoted Choudhury saying: “This is so unfair. I mean, for years we have dealt with a property that was neglected, and I’m going to show you something.” She also said: “Look at this. That’s the kind of seepage I have dealt with. But you know what? Let’s deduct the security deposit for barbed wires. How petty. How greedy.”
Was the security deposit actually withheld?
The report describes a threatened or proposed deduction, but does not say whether the landlady ultimately kept any of the deposit or how much was involved. It also does not provide the lease terms or other records that might clarify whether the wire removal was authorized or who was responsible for it. The dispute’s outcome therefore remains unestablished in the available account.
Rank #2
What reactions did the video receive?
Hindustan Times reported selected social-media comments from people sharing landlord-related experiences or expressing sympathy and anger. Those comments show some reactions reported by the outlet; they do not establish how viewers generally responded.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What is established—and what remains disputed?
- Reported: Choudhury shared a video while vacating after a three-year tenancy, and said a deduction was proposed over removed barbed wire.
- Shown or described by Choudhury: Seepage and a property she characterized as neglected.
- Not established by the report: Whether the deposit was actually reduced, what the lease allowed, whether removal of the wire was authorized, and the landlady’s account of the disagreement.
Hindustan Times’ report is the source for the incident and the statements attributed to Choudhury; it does not resolve the dispute.
Quick Recap
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
