Note – Evection Rights of Landlord

A lease deed governs the relationship between the landlord and the tenant, all the rights and
obligations of both the parties are to be clearly mentioned in the deed. In cases wherein a
lease deed is present, it is used to guide both the parties and so, the eviction rights of the
landlord are as per the provisions of the deed. However, in certain cases, there is no proper
registered deed to govern the parties; such lease is commonly referred to as tenancy at will.
Tenancy at will is governed by state laws, and eviction may be carried out in accordance with
the terms of those laws. Other frequent grounds for eviction include engaging in activities
that may diminish the rental property's usability or worth, permitting someone else to occupy
the property without the landlord's consent, utilising the property for illegal purposes, and the
end of the lease period. Before eviction may begin, an eviction notice must be sent.

In U. Pappanna Sastri v. Naga Venkata Satyavati 1 the Court placed reliance on K.

Sesharatnamma v. A. Satyanarayana2. It was held that the pre-condition for establishing the
tenant-landlord relationship is that the landlord should have reserved for himself the right to
evict the tenant.

Thus, if a person has the legal right to remove a tenant, he qualifies as a landlord under the
Act. Such an entitlement can emerge either directly from the agreement (by specifying the
length of the lease) or indirectly by specifying the criteria or terms of the tenancy, in violation
of which the tenant may be evicted under Section 13. We see no reason why a long-term
lease with terms would not result in a tenant-landlord relationship, because it is implicit in
such a contract that non-compliance with the terms will give the landlord the authority to
remove the tenant.3

The Telangana Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 under Section 10
deals with the eviction of tenants. This Section lays down that, on satisfaction of any of the
following situations, the landlord is entitled to get an order of eviction against the tenants
from the Controller:

(i) Failure by the tenant to pay the rent due in respect of the building within fifteen days after
the expiration of the term specified in the tenancy agreement with his landlord, or, in the
absence of such an agreement, by the last day of the month following the month for which the
rent is due, or

(ii) The tenant, without the written consent of the Landlord-

(a) If the lease does not grant him the right to sublet the entire property or any portion of it,
he has either (a) transferred his right under the lease or

(b) utilised the building for a purpose other than that for which it was leased., or

1
MANU/AP/0115/1972:AIR 1972 AP 53
2
1963 (2) An. W.R. 32
3
Chittoor Chegaiah and Ors. vs. Pedda Jeeyangar Mutt and Ors. MANU/SC/0147/2010: AIR2010SC1278
(iii) The tenant has committed such acts of waste as are likely to impair materially the value
or utility of the building, or

(iv) The tenant has been guilty of such acts and conduct which are a nuisance to the occupiers
of other portions in the same building or of buildings in the neighbourhood, or

(v) The tenant has secured alternative building or ceased to occupy the building for a,
continuous period of four months without reasonable cause, or

(vi) The tenant has denied the title of the landlord or claimed a right of permanent tenancy
and that such denial or claim was not bona fide.

On similar lines, Secton 111 of the Transfer of Property Act talks about determination of
lease, wherein it lays down certain situations when a lease for immovable property will come
to end. Further, Section 106 of the Act deals with cases wherein there is no written contract
between the parties. It lays down that, a lease for an immovable property may be terminated
be either of the parties by providing a fifteen days’ notice for the same. It is settled law that
notice for termination of lease has to be in mandatory terms so specified in Section 106 of
Transfer of Property Act.

As a general rule, it is mandatory to provide notice to the other party indicating the intension
of terminating the lease, however, in V. Dhanapal Chettiar vs. Yesodai Ammal 4, the Supreme
Court while discussing the question whether such a notice was at all necessary to be given,
held that, where contract is put to an end it has to be terminated by notice to quit as
mentioned in Section 106 of the Act. However, where lease of immovable property
determines in any one of modes prescribed under Section 111 then contract of lease come to
an end and landlord can exercise his right of re-entry. Thus, no question of giving notice to
quit to such lessee who continued in possession after determination of lease if contract once
came to an end there was no question of terminating contract over again by fresh notice.

4
MANU/SC/0505/1979:AIR1979SC1745