You are on page 1of 19

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF ADVANCED LEGAL STUDIES

LAND LAWS

PROJECT ON

RIGHT TO BUILDING AS IMMOVABLE PROPERTY

SUBMITTED BY
ATUL NARAYAN
ROLL NO. 845
SEMESTER VII

...................................................................................................................................................6 The Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control Act)......................Contents Introduction.........14 Increase of rent...........................................................................3 Leasehold and building rights............................................................................ 1965.........................................................................................3 Discussion..................................................................................................................................................................................................16 Bibliography....................................................................5 Leasehold....7 Rights of a Tenant............6 Scheme of Rent Control.................................................................................................5 Building rights............................................................................................................................................................................................................................17 ..........................................................................11 Determination of Rent...................................................................................................................................3 The dissociation between building and land property rights.....................................................................................................

considers that the right to build is of private nature. consists in the following: does the right to build constitute a private faculty. and is only applicable if there is such a relationship as the landlord and tenant. and not according to the limits imposed by the actual designs of privately-owned land spaces. is a faculty inherent to the right to private ownership of the land. business. The Rent Control Act is a self-contained statute and the rights and liabilities of the landlord and tenant are to be governed by its provisions1. Thus it consolidates the law relating to the property rental and eviction of tenant – for encouraging fair return on the investment by landlords and preventing undue harassment of tenants. It is with this jurisprudential principle of disassociation. 1965 is the state specific legislation as regards the same for the state of Kerala.. in order to protect individual rights that Rent Control Acts have been implemented by the State Governments. 1 Joy v. correspond to a public subjective right attributed by the public authorities? There are two principal theses concerning this problem. The Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent control) Act. 1984 KHC 66 . i. shall be dealt with in the discussive body of the project Discussion The dissociation between building and land property rights The problem of the legal nature of the “ius aedificandi” (The power to build). Rent control act typically applies to rental premises that are let for the purpose of residence. by allowing planners and the government to distribute built space according to their best judgment of an area’s good design.Introduction Landed property has traditionally. been limited by the right of accession that gives the owner of the land full ownership of every construction made above and below the ground. known as the private law thesis. trade or storage. in contrast. a brief position of major rights contained within. or does it. education. inherent to the right of private ownership of the land. The first thesis. Stephen Jacob.e. The dissociation between building and land property rights is essential to free land planning and design from the legal nature of land.

Supporters of this thesis. limitations or constraints on urban construction are understood as mere ties or restrictions imposed for reasons of public interest upon the exercise of private property rights. This viewpoint is based on the assumption that the owner only has the right to build on his/her land if two prerequisites have been satisfied. The second thesis. Symposium on Law and Property Rights Warsaw. notwithstanding the fact that they recognise that the owner may not build on his/her own plot of land without previously obtaining a construction permit from the local authority. Claudio Monteiro. In the same manner. which nonetheless remain intact in terms of their content. as soon as such ties or restrictions disappear due to cessation of the urban plan’s validity period or concession of a permit. the urban plan constitutes an instrument which shapes the very content of the private property right. known as the public law thesis. which respective attribution (at least to a large extent) depends on a discretionary decision of the Public Administration. 2008 . The right to build is thus created as a result of the approval of the urban plan or. by virtue of the elasticity that is characteristic to all rights in rem. through the concession of an allotment permit or building permit. namely that such construction is permitted by the urban plan and that the local authority grants a construction permit to him/her. notwithstanding the fact that they recognise that historically the “ius edificandi” began as a faculty integrated within the content of private ownership of land. However. thus transforming it into a public subjective right. consider that this permit does not interfere with the essence of the property right itself. the need for a permit only constitutes a limit upon the exercise of private property rights. From this perspective. considers that the right to build has public nature: it is a public subjective right separate from private property . consider that legislative development has progressively autonomised this right to the point where it has become completely separate from private property.2 2 Building rights as property rights. the provisions of urban plans that impose prohibitions.Supporters of this thesis. the owner reassumes exercise of his/her rights in full and with a faculty to build within his/her land. in the absence of such a plan. From this perspective.

given that this faculty is based on the assumption that the owner benefits from the full power of disposal of that which pertains to him/her.Naturally. and consequently a closer tie between ownership of the land and the faculty to build on it. the public law thesis. Therefore the leaseholder rarely seems to avail of the same rights as the owner. as a result of which he/she gains nothing in adding construction volume to the building potential that the plan recognises for his/her plot of land. according to the law. the limitation of the use and the meaning and impact of stipulations in the deed with which the lease is vested. Leasehold and building rights Leasehold and building rights are both so-called limited property rights derived from the nature of buildings as immovable property. Discussions about the nature and extent of the use of the leaseholder and the legal nature of the terms agreed in the framework of the lease are often typical in property disputes. views the dissociation between the two rights with greater ease. it is easier for the private law thesis to recognise that the owner of these lands has the faculty of freely negotiating his/ her rights. this thesis also tends to emphasise the nature of the right to build as a right in rem. the public law thesis assigns to the local authority the power to regulate urban land use. Leasehold The leasehold gives the leaseholder a right of use of a property. Moreover. both pending and new. Thus. However. thereby constraining the freedom that owners require in order to freely negotiate the respective development rights between themselves. If long term lease of property exists. in the deed with which the rights of the leaseholder are vested. From the perspective of the public law thesis. we can inform you of the rights and obligations of the leaseholder. . In principle. based on the autonomy of the right to build in relation to private property rights. automatically these rights are always based on or related to immovable property. It is under this body of views that Leasehold and building rights receive differential validity. these rights are often limited. In contrast. this is the same use that an owner of a property would have. the private land owner may only build that which the plan or other acts issued by the local authority permit him/her to build. However.

Building rights An important principle in ownership of immovable property is that the owner of the land is also the owner of the buildings and works that are (permanently) connected to that land. 4 1980 KLT 897. Krishnan4. When the leaseholder has a right of use of the entire property.1(3). for example with multi-level buildings where the rooms and floors are used in different ways. 1955. the superficiary in principle only has a title to the buildings and works. The main objects of the Act are a direct exclamation to the ‘protection through distinction’ of building and property rights and the same has been interpreted into the scope of the legislation. 1965 was enacted based on a central directive towards the same. where the recipient owns or acquires the property of buildings / works on or above another’s immovable property. Its application to other areas is to be made only if it is supported by a resolution passed by the local authority. An exception to this rule is the building right. AIR 1981 KER 24 . Kerala Buildings(Rent and Lease Control) Act. The same act and the major rights it promulgates and protects are discussed below: The Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control Act). the court has held that the main objects of the Act are the following: 1) To regulate the letting of buildings 2) To prevent unreasonable eviction of tenants from buildings 3) To control the rent of let out buildings 3 S. In Standard Cashew Industries v. 3 The court observed that if the legislature wanted to take the local authorities to confidence and assign them a role in deciding whether the Act should be made applicable to any area it is legislative policy which cannot be called in question unless it is unconstitutional or illegal. 1965 The Act was enacted in 1965 to regulate the leasing of building and to control the rent of such buildings. The application of the Act is confined to areas specified in the Act. There may be practical reasons to establish a right to build. It is in light of this jurisprudential position that The Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control Act).

3(1) of the Act. the word building. The fittings or the machinery are not for the beneficial enjoyment of the tenant but they are for the very purpose which the building is let. or part of building or hut and let or to be let along with such building or hut b) Any furniture supplied by the landlord for use in such building or hut or part of a building or hut but does not include a room in a hotel or boarding house c) Any fittings or machinery belonging to the landlord affixed to or installed in such building or part of such building and intended to be used by the tenant for or in connection witht the purpose for which or part of such building is let or to be let The word building in the Act thus includes building huts and furniture and fittings.Thus the objects are a clear indicator to the above position. Krishnan. Kerala Building(lease and rent control). Act 1955. 6 S. A factory with fittings and machinery adapted for running the business falls squarely within the definition of word Building. Kerala Building(lease and rent control). for the purpose of the act. This Act does not include a room in hotel or broadening house.3(2) of the Act.7 Every landlord may within 15 days after construction 5 M/s Standard Cashews Industries v. the tenant cannot be allowed to put up constructions and enjoy the same. Now. N.6 The Government may by notification in the Gazette appoint any officer not below the rank of a Tahsildar to be the Accommodation Controller for any area. and structures. tanks. .5 Once structure is destroyed completely. not just from the ownership perspective of the land but the tenancy and leasehold perspective of the building. wells. AIR 1981 Ker 24. Scheme of Rent Control The government may by notification appoint a person who is or is qualified to be appointed a Munsiff to be the Rent Control Court for the areas specified therein. grounds. 7 S. or to be let separately for residential or non-residential purpose and includes: a) The garden. and potentially stands guard over the derived rights as well as inherent rights. if any appurtenant to such building. means any building or hut or part of a building or hut let. Act 1955. They form an integral and indivisible part of the subject matter of the lease.

the landlord shall deliver possession of 8 Section 4(1) (a) .10 If the Accommodation Controller does not intimate the landlord within 15 days of the receipt of the notice that the building is required for the purpose of the State or Central government. Act 1955. 4(2) . before the expiry of three months. then on the expiry of such period.11 The landlord shall not let the building or occupy it himself before the expiry of the period of 15 days of the notice given to the Accommodation Controller unless intimation is received from the authorities that the building is not required for the purpose of occupation by any officer of government/ local authority or such other officers as may be prescribed. 4(3). 4(2). apply to the Accommodation Controller to reoccupy the building within a period of 6 months and if such permission is granted tenancy may continue. Kerala Building(lease and rent control). the tenancy shall be deemed to have terminated and it shall be the duty of the tenant to give notice thereof in writing to the Accommodation Controller within 15 days of such termination.9 The tenant may. Act 1955. Act 1955. Kerala Building(lease and rent control). Act 1955. Kerala Building(lease and rent control).or reconstruction of the building intended to be let out or after a building became vacant by his ceasing to occupy it or by termination of a tenancy or by release from requisition by the government or any other authority giving notice of the availability of vacancy in writing to the Accommodation Controller. .8 If the tenant of a building puts another person in occupation thereof and does not reoccupy within period of 3 months. 10 Proviso to S. give notice of in writing to the Accommodation Controller. If the landlord is aware of termination he shall also give notice of it to the Accommodation Controller within the same time limit.12 If the building is required for the purpose of state/ Central Government or any local authority or any public institution or for the occupation by any officer. 12 Sec. or public institution. the landlord shall be at liberty to let the building to any tenant or to occupy it himself. Kerala Building(lease and rent control). Kerala Building(lease and rent control). 4(4). Act 1955. any local authority. Similarly every tenant shall within 15 days of his vacating a building occupied by him. 9 S. 11 Sec.

and if the Accommodation Controller is not so satisfied he shall make an order refusing such permission. local authority or public institution or the officer shall be deemed to be the tenant with effect from the date on which the Accommodation Controller received the notice. within fifteen days from the date of the receipt of such order. 16 Third proviso under S.14 A building used as a residential building shall not be used as a non-residential building or vice-versa unless the Accommodation Controller grants permission. such fair as may be determined under the Act. 15 Second proviso under S. town or village. 14 First proviso under S. Kerala Building(lease and rent control).l 4(5). Kerala Building(lease and rent control). 4(6)(a).the building to the Accommodation Controller and the government.4(5). . Kerala Building(lease and rent control). Kerala Building(lease and rent control). 4(6)(b).4(5). 4(5). Act 1955.15 No structural alteration shall be made in the building unless the consent of the landlord is obtained. Act 1955. Any landlord who is aggrieved by any order passed by the Accommodation Controller may. 17 Sec. Kerala Building(lease and rent control). Act 1955.16 Where a landlord has two or more residential buildings in the same city. Act 1955. 13 Sec. 18 Sec.13 In such cases the rent payable shall be fair rent fixed for the building and if no fair rent has been fixed. the landlord may choose one of them for his own occupation and shall give notice to the Accommodation Controller specifying the building so chosen and the other buildings not so chosen. prefer an appeal in writing to the District Collector within whose jurisdiction the building in respect of which the order appealed against is situated and he shall pass such orders on the appeal as he may think fit. Act 1955. make an order permitting the landlord to allow such member to occupy the building. 18 if he is satisfied that the building is required by any member of the family of the landlord bona fide for such occupation.17 When giving notice the landlord shall specify whether any building other than the one chosen by him has been continuously in the occupation by any member of his family. Act 1955. Kerala Building(lease and rent control).

1955. local authority. association. between 6 a. To any building of which the rent does not. and 6 p. tenant. Similarly any officer empowered may summarily dispossess any person. To any building or buildings owned by any company. or any landlord who fails to deliver possession of any building required for occupation by any State/central government. incurred by the Government in effecting such summary dispossession. tenant or other person or any officer.The Accommodation Controller shall allot the building vested in him under sub-section (5) or sub. local authority or public institution. . Nothing contained in this section shall apply . 4(7)(a)(ii). after giving reasonable warning and facility to withdraw to any woman not appearing in public according to the customs of the country remove or open any lock or bolt or break open any door or do any other act necessary for effecting such dispossession. officer. 4(7)(b). local authority or public institution. 19 If free access to the building is not afforded to the officer empowered under CL (a) he may. whether incorporated or not and bona fide intended solely for the occupation of its officers. m. 21 Sec. 1955.a. town or village. or b. 21 Duties and powers of the Accommodation Controllers   To act upon the notice of vacancy under Section 4 To intimate the landlord that the building is required for the purpose allotment to the applicants. the fair rent would not. exceed fifteen rupees per mensem. as determined by them.(i) The fair rent payable for the building under the provisions of the Act for the period of his or its occupation or possession thereof as described in that CL. 19 Sec. or other person occupying any building in contravention of these provisions.section (6) to persons mentioned in sub section (3) according to the rules and priorities prescribed by the government. (in the order prescribed by the rules). m. or firm. and (ii) The expenses. 4(7)(c). Act 1955. Kerala Buildings(Rent and Lease Control) Act. or where the rent has not been fixed. continuing to occupy or failing to deliver possession of any building after termination of his license. if any. Any officer empowered by the Government may dispossess any landlord. when fixed. servants or agents and situated in the same city. which determination shall be final. liable to be summarily dispossessed under CL (a) shall pay to the Government. 20 Sec. 20 Any landlord. Kerala Buildings(Rent and Lease Control) Act. Kerala Building(lease and rent control).

Rule 3 of the Kerala buildings (lease and Rent Control Rules 1979 provides procedure to be followed with regard to notice of vacancy while considering the issue as contemplated under section with regard to the permission to the landlord or his dependent to occupy the building bonafide use. the same has not been taken away in principle and the rent fixed by the landlord shall not by unreasonable. For affecting necessary repairs after notice to the landlord and for adjusting the amount. In cases falling under Section 4 he may follow the procedure prescribed under Rule 20. The Accommodation Controller is vested with power to dispossess the occupants of the  buildings vested in him under Section 4(5) and 6 of the Act. Rights of a Tenant A. under  Section 13 of the Act. To give permission to the tenants for conversion of the building as provided in Section 17 of the Act. Right against arbitrary eviction 1. The fair rent shall be determined by the Rent Control Court on application made by the tenant or the landlord as the case may be. In Ouseph Mathai v. To decide in the matter of withholding of cutting of amenities by the landlord. The tenant shall not be evicted except under the grounds mentioned in S. So spend towards rent. Right to fair rent The tenant is liable to pay only the fair rent. Though the provisions concerning fair rent have been declared unconstitutional by the court as violative of the right to business of the landlord under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution . The court shall vacate the order if the tenant deposits the arrears of rent with the cost of proceedings within the said period. 11 of the Act. To allot the building vested in him under Section 4(5) and 4(6) of the Act to the person  mentioned in Section 4(3) of the Act. Abdul .  To entertain the claim of requirement of the building under Section 4(6)(6)(ii) of the Act. B. he shall follow the procedure laid down by Rule 13 of said rules. Any order of eviction on the ground of arrears of rent shall not be executed except after the expiry of one month from the order. 2.

the landlord willfully neglected to reconstruction the building within such time fixed or extended by the Rent Control Court. Where landlord seeks to evict the tenant on the ground of bona fide need for his own occupation of the family members. the Supreme Court held that the order under S. The tenant so evicted shall have the first option to have the reconstructed building allotted to him with the liability to pay the fair rent. the protection son granted is limited to the tenants who are natural persons or group of persons in contrast to legal entities like companies and statutory bodies. 11 (2) becomes final on the expiry of the time granted for deposit of arrears of rent by the courts. if the livelihood of the tenant is solely dependent on the income derived from any trade or business carried on in that building and there is no other suitable available in the locality.Khadir22. 3. The wide powers under the proviso to S. 5. A doctor running a nursing home is carrying on a ‘business’ within the meaning of ‘trade or business’. 4. and having evicted the tenant. Upon failure of the landlord. Where tenancy is for an agreed period. the Court may impose a fine of Rs. In other words. the grant of stay does not amount to automatic extension of the statutory protection. 500/-. Where a tenant is evicted on the ground of bonafide need for reconstruction. However. the court may issue further directions regarding the reconstruction and may even put back the tenant in possession in appropriate cases or award the evicted tenant damages equivalent to the excess rent he has to pay for another building that he is occupying in consequence of the eviction. 6. the landlord shall not be entitled to tender an application for eviction to the Rent Control Court before the expiry of such period. ‘his livelihood’ can have reference only to natural persons and not to inanimate lifeless legal entities like cooperative societies. 11 (4) (iv) include 22 AIR 2002 SC 110 . the Court shall not give a direction to the tenant to put the landlord in possession. No tenant shall be evicted on the ground of additional accommodation for personal use of the landlord where the hardship of the tenant outweighs the advantages of the landlord.

no such protection can be thereby claimed where the institution in which the courses are conducted is unrecognized even if certain courses were recognized. and therefore valid. 1940 shall be evicted for bona fide occupation of the landlord or for occupation of any of the occupation by any member of his family dependent on him. in Balan v. However. (a) No order of eviction shall be passed against a tenant who is engaged in any employment or any class of employment notified by the Government as an essential service unless the landlord is himself engaged in any employment or class of employment which has been so notified and the landlord requires the building for his own occupation. Special Protection to identified tenants The Act envisages special protection to certain identified tenants based on the nature of employment or profession. It has been rightly held by K. J.K. However. (a) where the landlord has been living in a place outside the city. C. town or village in which the building is situated for a period of not less than five years before he makes an application to the Rent Control Court for being put in possession of the building. Gopalan Nair that a notification issued by the Government of Kerala declaring that the following tenants shall be deemed to be engaged in essential service for the purposes of the said section is not violative of the Constitution. .the powers even to permit the affected tenant. No tenant who has been in continuous occupation of a building from April 1. and (b) Requires the building bona fide for his own permanent residence or for the permanent residence of any member of his family or (c) the landlord is in dire need of a place for residence and has none of his own. (b) No order of eviction shall be passed in respect of any building which has been let for use as a recognized educational institution. Mathew. this protection is not granted. in appropriate cases to carry out the reconstruction if the landlord persists his unreasonable refusal to complete reconstruction.

E.D. then the procedure under S. 50/-.a. to the satisfaction of the Accommodation Controller. 50/-. If any landlord cut off or withhold the amenities enjoyed by the tenant with a view to compel him to vacate the building or to pay an enhanced rent or without just and reasonable cause. Right of restoration Where an eviction was effected by the landlord for his own use. Right to periodical maintenance It shall be the duty of the landlord to attend to the periodical maintenance and necessary repairs of the building. Right not to be interfered with the amenities The tenant has a right to not to be interfered with the amenities enjoyed by him. the Accommodation Controller may direct on application by the tenant that such maintenance and repairs be attended by the tenant. The provision concerning compensation requires revision. G. Frivolous Petition Where an application for eviction made by the landlord is frivolous or vexatious. However. the Accommodation Controller may pass such orders directing the landlord to restore the amenities and to pay compensation not exceeding Rs. the tenant shall be entitled to compensation. F. But when the tenant fails without reasonable cause to make an application for restoration of possession within one month since the right accrued. the tenant can seek a restoration of possession. vacates it without reasonable cause within six months of such date.4 relating to notice of vacancy to the Accommodation Controller shall apply. this provision has now become obsolete since the maximum compensation to be paid by the landlord to the tenant as per the statute is Rs. If the landlord fails to attend to such maintenance or repairs to the building and amenities within reasonable time. (a) If the landlord does not occupy it without reasonable cause within one month of the date of obtaining possession. or (b) Having so occupied it. The charges and the costs incurred may be deducted from the rent payable at an interest of 6% p.The .

35A and S.23 The pegging of the rents at the 1940 rates had discouraged building construction activity which ultimately is likely to affect everybody and therefore in order to encourage new constructions exempted them altogether from the provisions of the Act. considering their relative economic circumstances. Section 105 of the Transfer of Property Act defines the word rent. v. 2005(4)KLT 850 24 Raval and Co.compensation payable should be augmented in tune with the changing times in accordance with the principle of compensatory costs under S. it was held that Civil Court has got the power to fix fair rent. It is clear therefore that the Madras legislature deliberately proceeded on the basis that fair rent was to be fixed which has to be fair both to the landlords as well as to the tenants and that only the poorer classes of tenants needed protection. Ramachandran AIR 1974 SC 818 25 Devasy v. Fair rent is not what a tenant has acquiesced in for reasons of prudence but what the law prescribes to be fair in spite of his consent to pay the higher rent. It may have been paid in lump sum in advance covering the period for which the premises is let out or sublet or it may have been paid or promised to be paid periodically. Determination of Rent The word rent is not defined in the Act. It may be paid in cash or may have been paid or promised to be paid.C. It did not proceed on the basis that all tenants belonged to the weaker section of the community and needed protection and that all landlords belonged to the better of classes. K. State of Kerala26 Constructing buildings and letting them out for rent to tenants 23 Vipinachandran v. undoubtedly. Payment of rent. That you cannot acquiesced away your right to fix fair rent is basic to this type of legislation.25 In Aboobakar v. is an essential element of lease or sublease. Xavier . 250.95 of CPC. 1969 KLT 541 26 1995 (2) KLJ 555 . Therefore it is to be interpreted in its grammatical connotations. Issac Ninan v. Vasu. 24 Fair rent is not what a tenant always what is fair between particular landlord and his tenant. It confined the protection of the Act to the weaker section paying rents below Rs. Joseph.

Civil Court is also bound to transmit all records including the evidence taken so that the rent control court could continue  the proceeding with the evidence already on record or to be adduced by the parties. Proceedings under S. 2004(1)KLT 767. it must be held to be warranting in that qualities. that does not in any manner deprive the rent  controller of his jurisdiction to fix the fair rent. In Art. If no tax is fixed for the building the fair rent shall be fixed on the basis of  rent for similar accommodation in the similar circumstances.6 and 8 of the Act is a gross invasion on the right of a landlord to carry on business. 5 is taken to be not available. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Legislation while arbitrarily invaded the right cannot be said to contain the quality of reasonableness unless it strikes a proper balance between the freedoms guaranteed under Art. beyond what is required in the interest of general public. Narayani.would also fall within the ambit of business. 27 Matters to be considered while fixing rent  The Rent Control Court shall consider the property tax or house tax fixed by the local authority. 2004 (3) KLT 767 29 George v. . the phrase reasonable restriction connotes that limitation imposed on a person in enjoyment of the right should not be arbitrary or of an excessive nature.29 Even if there is no provision for periodical rent revision in the rent deed the landlord can approach the rent control court for revision rent. 28 Abdul Hakeem Haji v. Section 5(1) is reinstated and the Landlord or tenant can approach the Rent control court to fix fair rent.5. 1989(1)KLT 239. Abraham Itticheriya.28 Even if S. Rent control court while fixing the fair rent could take note of : (i) the inflation and the resultant reduction in purchasing power (ii) variation in the cost of living index in the area since commencement of the lease. If so. 19(1)(g) and the social control permitted under clause (6) of Art 19.5 for fixation of fair rent pending before Civil Court should be transmitted suo-motu by the Civil Court to concerned Rent Control Court so that litigant public would not be put to difficulties. Nandagopalan. (iii) demand for accommodation and availability of the building in the locality (iv) prevailing rent in the locality for the similar accommodation (v) the type of construction (vi) the general or special amenities 27 Edger Ferus v. the combined operation of S.

2004(1)KLT 767 31 Chandrakala v. Since the document is unregistered the remedy available is to approach the rent control court for fixing of fair rent. It relates to cases where Rent Control courts have determined the fair rent of a building. Soman. 6 or 8 or nay of the restrictions contained therein for fixing fair rent. Unregistered lease deed could be looked into for ascertaining the commencement of possession.30 Unregistered lease deed cannot be pressed into service to create any right for revision of rent. improvement or alteration has been made at the landlord’s expenses. no further increases in fair rent shall be permissible except in cases here some necessary addition. Increase of rent Once the fair rent of a building has been fixed. 5. However. The refund shall be limited to the amount paid in 30 Edger Ferus v. Any excess received shall be refunded by the landlord. cess rates in respect of other increase in the charge of electricity or water consumption by the tenant and also by the landlord (x increase in account of repairs are to be taken into account. 2004 (3) KLT 432 . The only thing is that the rent controller could not rely on Ss.31 The rent control court has got jurisdiction to fix fair rent. Fair rent has to be understood as a rent a willing tenant would pay to a willing landlord. rate of rent or similar other provisions which are collateral to the principal transaction. Section 8 imposes a bar on claiming excess rent. The fair rent so increased shall not exceed the rent payable under the Act for a similar building in the same locality with such additional improvement or alteration has been completed. Abraham Itticheriya. receive or stipulate for any premium or other like sum or anything in excess of fair rent except as provided in Section 6 or section 7. for a building commensurate with the rent prevalent locality and the nature and location of the building.provided in the building (vii) whether residential or non-residential (viii) Annual rental value of the building at the time of filing application for fair rent (ix) revision or fresh imposition of municipal taxes. the landlord shall not claim. there is no bar to the landlord receiving or stipulating for payment of an amount exceeding one month’s rent by way of advance. According to it.

AIR 2000 SC 1808. Khairati Lal. the rent of a building payable monthly will become due at the end of each month. A tenant paying rent or advance is entitled to receipt. Aliammal. . Non-payment of rent due to restraint order of government cannot be treated as willful default.excess for a period of three years before institution of proceedings. Kerala Building(lease and rent Control) Act 33 Jermons v. may be withdrawn by the landlord subject to certain conditions. 33 In the absence of any contract to the contrary. 32 The rent lawfully deposited may be withdrawn by the tenant.34 Bibliography 32 Section 9. AIR 1999 SC 304 34 Kamala Bakshi v.

Claudio Monteiro.1) BOBBY MANI.indiakanoon. 2008.) 2012 2) Building rights as property rights.org 4) http://www. Symposium on Law and Property Rights Warsaw.jstor.org/stable/49857?sq=1#page_scan_tab_contents . 3) www. COMMENTARY ON THE RENT CONTROL LAWS IN KERALA (6th edn.