Case Note & Summary
The case involves a Civil Revision Application filed by the applicants (tenants) challenging the judgment and order dated 06/12/2016 passed by the District Judge-12, Nagpur, which dismissed their appeal under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, confirming the decree of eviction passed by the trial court in favor of the respondents (landlords). The suit property is a plot with structures admeasuring 18755 sq. ft. at Khare Town, Nagpur. The applicant no.1 entered into possession under a rent note dated 25/06/1972 executed by the erstwhile landlord. The respondents purchased the suit property on 23/06/1992, and their vendor issued a notice of attornment dated 19/10/1992, whereby the tenancy stood attorned in favor of the respondents. In 1992, the respondents filed an application under Section 8 of the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949, for fixation of fair rent. Subsequently, on 25/03/1998, the respondents issued a notice to the applicants calling upon them to vacate the suit property, stating that the tenancy stood forfeited due to the applicants' denial of title in their reply to the notice of attornment. On 30/11/2003, the respondents issued another notice under Sections 15 and 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, claiming arrears of rent for 137 months. The trial court decreed eviction on grounds of forfeiture of tenancy and arrears of rent. The appellate court confirmed the decree. The High Court, in revision, examined whether the denial of title by the tenant in reply to the notice of attornment amounted to forfeiture under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and whether the tenant was liable for eviction under Section 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The court held that the tenant's denial of the landlord's title in the reply dated 19/10/1992 was clear and unequivocal, and the landlord's notice dated 25/03/1998 electing to terminate the tenancy on that ground resulted in forfeiture. The court also found that the tenant was in arrears of rent for 137 months and failed to pay or tender the arrears despite notice under Section 15 of the Act. The High Court dismissed the revision application, confirming the concurrent findings of the courts below.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Forfeiture of Tenancy - Denial of Landlord's Title - Section 111(g) Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - The tenant's reply to the notice of attornment dated 19/10/1992, wherein the tenant denied the landlord's title, amounted to forfeiture of tenancy under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The court held that such denial, coupled with the landlord's election to terminate the tenancy by notice dated 25/03/1998, resulted in forfeiture. (Paras 2-5)
B) Rent Control - Eviction - Arrears of Rent - Sections 15 and 16(1)(g) Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 - The tenant was in arrears of rent for 137 months, and despite notice under Section 15 of the Act, failed to pay or tender the arrears. The court held that the tenant was liable for eviction under Section 16(1)(g) of the Act. (Paras 3, 6-7)
C) Rent Control - Attornment - Notice of Attornment - The landlord purchased the suit property on 23/06/1992 and issued a notice of attornment dated 19/10/1992. The tenant's reply denying the landlord's title was held to be a denial of the landlord's title, leading to forfeiture. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the denial of the landlord's title by the tenant in reply to a notice of attornment amounts to forfeiture of tenancy under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and whether the tenant is liable for eviction under Section 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 for arrears of rent.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the Civil Revision Application, confirming the judgment and order of the District Judge-12, Nagpur, dated 06/12/2016, which had dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decree of eviction passed by the trial court.
Law Points
- Forfeiture of tenancy under Section 111(g) of Transfer of Property Act
- 1882
- Denial of landlord's title
- Arrears of rent under Section 15 of Maharashtra Rent Control Act
- 1999
- Eviction under Section 16(1)(g) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act
- Attornment of tenancy
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (03) 169
Civil Revision Application No.27 of 2017
Shri P.A. Abhyankar for applicants, Shri Masood Shareef with Shri Aadil Mirza for non-applicants
Chandrashekhar S. Gadgil, Hindu Gyanpeeth Convent
Rameshprasad s/o Madhavprasad Shukla, Smt. Rajeshwari w/o Rameshprasad Shukla
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil Revision Application challenging the judgment and order of the District Court dismissing the appeal under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, and confirming the decree of eviction passed by the trial court.
Remedy Sought
The applicants (tenants) sought to set aside the judgment and order dated 06/12/2016 passed by the District Judge-12, Nagpur, dismissing their appeal and confirming the eviction decree.
Filing Reason
The applicants challenged the concurrent findings of the courts below that their tenancy stood forfeited due to denial of the landlord's title and that they were liable for eviction for arrears of rent.
Previous Decisions
The trial court decreed eviction on grounds of forfeiture of tenancy under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and arrears of rent under Section 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The appellate court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decree.
Issues
Whether the denial of the landlord's title by the tenant in reply to the notice of attornment amounts to forfeiture of tenancy under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?
Whether the tenant is liable for eviction under Section 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 for arrears of rent?
Submissions/Arguments
The applicants (tenants) argued that the denial of title was not unequivocal and that the notice of forfeiture was not valid.
The respondents (landlords) contended that the tenant's reply clearly denied their title, leading to forfeiture, and that the tenant was in arrears of rent for 137 months.
Ratio Decidendi
The denial of the landlord's title by the tenant in reply to the notice of attornment, coupled with the landlord's election to terminate the tenancy, results in forfeiture of tenancy under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Additionally, failure to pay arrears of rent despite notice under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, justifies eviction under Section 16(1)(g) of the Act.
Judgment Excerpts
The applicant no.1 entered into the possession of the suit property bearing plot no.59, Khare Town, North Ambazari Road, Dharampeth, Nagpur, admeasuring 18755 sq.ft. together with structures thereon as per rent note dated 25/06/1972.
The respondents purchased the suit property on 23/06/1992. Thereafter, their vendor issued a notice of attornment dated 19/10/1992, whereby the tenancy stood attorned in favour of the respondents.
In the year 1992, the respondents filed an application under Section 8 of the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949, against the applicants for fixation of fair rent.
Thereafter, they issued notice on 25/03/1998 to the applicants through their Advocate calling upon the applicants to vacate the suit property within 30 days from the receipt of the notice and it was stated that in view of the allegations made by the applicants in reply to the aforesaid notice dated 19/10/1992 issued by the respondents, their tenancy stood forfeited.
Thereafter, on 30/11/2003, the respondents issued a notice to the applicants under Sections 15 and 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 stating that the applicants had been in arrears of rent for a period of 11 years and five months (137 months) and that they were liable to pay an amount.
Procedural History
The respondents (landlords) filed a suit for eviction against the applicants (tenants) in the trial court. The trial court decreed eviction on grounds of forfeiture of tenancy and arrears of rent. The applicants appealed to the District Court, which dismissed the appeal on 06/12/2016. The applicants then filed the present Civil Revision Application before the High Court, which was dismissed on 22/03/2018.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999: 15, 16(1)(g)
- Transfer of Property Act, 1882: 111(g)
- Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949: 8
