Menu
keyboard_backspace
ask a question ask a question
Get Realtime Updates of your Request. Download Vidhkarya App

Ask a Question - Free Legal Advice

Q.Court fees for eviction of Lessee
Administrative Law (470)
Adoption (125)
Advertising (59)
Animal Laws (40)
Arbitration and Mediation (50)
Aviation (16)
Banking (593)
Bankruptcy and Debt (201)
Cheque Bounce (424)
Child Custody (166)
Civil (2161)
Commercial (93)
Consumer Protection (583)
Contracts and Agreements (490)
Corporate and Incorporation (114)
Criminal (1692)
Customs, Excise (42)
Cyber, Internet, Information Technology (354)
Debt and Lending Agreement (79)
Debt Collection (178)
Divorce (667)
Divorce and Separation (1602)
Documentation (316)
Domestic Violence (645)
Election Campaign and Political Laws (23)
Employment and Labour (1172)
Environment and Natural Resources (31)
Equipment Finance and Leasing (3)
Family (2060)
Financial Markets and Services (101)
Government Contracts (57)
Human Rights (278)
Immigration (56)
Industrial Laws (66)
Insurance (81)
Intellectual Property, Copyright, Patent, Trademark (111)
International Laws (12)
IT Contracts (54)
Juvenile (17)
Landlord and Tenant (630)
Licensing (21)
Mail Fraud (18)
Maternity (61)
Media, Communication, Entertainment (16)
Mergers and Acquisition (20)
Military Laws (17)
Motor Accident (145)
Muslim Laws (60)
Outsourcing Agreement/Laws (5)
Partnership (64)
Police Laws (64)
Power of Attorney (75)
Privacy (97)
Property (3038)
Real Estate (433)
Registration (139)
RTI (111)
Sale (61)
Sale of Goods (20)
Sex Crime (142)
Sexual Harassment (6)
Sexual Harassment at Workplace (69)
Software License (4)
Tax (19)
Tax-GST (11)
Tax-Income Tax (26)
Tax-Property Tax (35)
Telecommunication (13)
Torts (22)
Transportation (64)
Trust and Society (NGO) (89)
Will (144)
Work Permits (33)

Q. Court fees for eviction of Lessee

Placeholder image

Faiz Quadir

posted 3 months ago

Greetings
Facts:
- Open piece of land leased through a registered lease deed. - Yearly rent reserved as 1/- (one rupee) per year.
- One of the condition in lease-deed was that if lessee does not pay rent, landlord/owner will have the right to re-enter the leased property.
- Lessee has not paid any rent for last 15 years.
- Property is situated in Uttar Pradesh.

Questions:
- What should be the notice period for demand of rent and possession? 15 days, one month or six months (rent payable is yearly)?
- What will be court fees if a suit for eviction is filed? On the basis of (agreed) rent OR market value of property?
- Which court will have jurisdiction to entertain the case, JSCC or civil court? or any?

Thanks
Share this questionShare Icon

Showing 5 of 5 Responses

A. File a suit for recovery of possession u/s 6 of the SRA. The relief under other acts would go away with payment of rent.
Thanks
Shreyash Mohta

Found Helpful
Found Helpful
Share this answerShare Icon

Shreyash Mohta

Experience: 1 Year(s)

Responded 3 months ago

View All Answers
Reply Here

A. My suggestion is this - file a suit for recovery of possession under section 6 of Specific Relief Act. If you file a case under normal rent control laws, they might satisfy the court by paying the rent agreed upon in the lease deed.

Found Helpful
Found Helpful
Share this answerShare Icon

Viswanath M K

Experience: 5 Year(s)

Responded 3 months ago

View All Answers
Reply Here

A. Dear client after readout all your facts I would to advice you that kindly ho through U.P. ACT 013 OF 1972 : UTTAR PRADESH URBAN BUILDINGS (REGULATION OF LETTING, RENT AND EVICTION) ACT, 1972. You will find out all your answers.

Found Helpful
Found Helpful
Share this answerShare Icon

Deepak Bade

Experience: 9 Year(s)

Responded 3 months ago

View All Answers
Reply Here

A. Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 lays down a general rule that a lease of immovable property for agricultural or manufacturing purpose shall terminate on six months’ notice by either the lessor[2] or lessee[3], while fifteen days is the time period in the case of a lease of immovable property for a purpose other than agricultural one. Every notice under this section has to be in writing, signed by or on behalf of the person giving it; either sent by post or is delivered personally.

This section has been amended and altered several times. By the amendment act of 1929, “either be sent by post to the party who is intended to be bound by it or be tendered or delivered personally to such party” has been substituted with “tendered or delivered personally to the party who is intended to be bound by it.”

By local acts, the following two changes have been brought in the section. Firstly, ‘expiring with the end of a year of the tenancy’ and ‘expiring with the end of a month of the tenancy’ have been omitted. Secondly, the words ‘fifteen days’ and ‘notice’ have been substituted by the words ‘thirty days’ and ‘notice’.

The purpose of the provision in sec. 106 is to terminate the relationship of lessor and lessee before the lessor sues for possession. He has no right of entry till the tenancy is disrupted. Further, the idea is that every lessee must have some reasonable notice before he is asked to vacate the premises.[4]

There are various controversies related to section 106 and all of this started with the wrong interpretation of the case of Mangilal vs. SuganChand,[5]. Years after the notice and the filing of the suit, the court would be compelled to declare the notice invalid, though the defendant had more than the prescribed time of six months or fifteen days by the date of filing of the suit or by the date of judgment dismissing the suit.

Also In the case where the lessess plea was accepted regarding commencement of tenancy this technicality has been leading to too much of an injustice to the plaintiff though no prejudice at all is caused to the defendant. This was all because of the case of Mangilal vs. SuganChand[6]. In Dattonpant vs. Vithalrao[7] similar principle was applied which clearly led injustice to the lessor.

The 108th report on ‘Amendment to sec.106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882’ of Law Commission of India, suggested that some provisions of the section needs to be amended. The committee proposed that the provision of expiry should be removed and the duration of 15 days must be substituted by 60 days. This proposal has not been approved yet by the union of India.

LIMITATIONS OF THE SECTION

The scope of this section is limited to certain conditions. They are:-

CONTRACT TO THE CONTRARY – There is not a necessity is this section that the contract to the contrary should be expressed only, rather it can be implied also the only condition being that the contract needs to be valid. All the stipulated provisions under section 106 of the act will remain active until there is a contract to the contrary as to the time of the duration of the lease in the lease agreement. Now the major limitation of this section is that if there is a contract to the contrary with different provisions regarding duration of lease then the statutory requirement of notice is of no use.

In the landmark case of Moosa Ruty v Thekka[8], the court held that it is not necessary to send a notice to the lessee about the land; a demand will be sufficient if the lease carries a condition that the concerned land will be surrendered whenever required.

In the case of V. Sidharthan v PattiortiRamadasan[9], the court held that the lessee is bound to surrender the premise on demand of the lessor. This would show a “contract to the contrary”. Also in the very case of Amar Singh v. Hoshir Singh[10], the court explicitly held that the lessor has the right to evict the lessee without even presenting a prior notice if the lessee fails to pay the agreed rent.

LOCAL LAW TO THE CONTRARY – The presumption considered in this section as to certain leases being deemed to be from year to year or from month to month, can be raised only in cases, where there is no local law to the contrary. It can’t be made if there is a law unexpectedly. Such law must be in force at the time of the judgment. Thus the local law would prevail if the law of the land has stopped to be in force.

Likewise in Uttar Pradesh understanding that the system for interpretation of section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was prompting foul play convincing the lessor to record the crisp suits after quite a long while have slipped by. The legislature of UP had, by Act 24 of 1954, precluded the words “terminating with the end of a month of the tenure”. It had likewise expanded the time of notice of 15 days on account of month to month tenures to 30 days. After the said UP amendment, the first part of sec. 106 reads as follows:[11]

The said contrary view is reflected in Gorakh Lal v. Maha Prasad Narain Singh[12]which also adhered to the principles of the UP act.

USAGE TO THE CONTRARY – many times the provisions stated in section 106 have been doubted and were only considered applicable if there is no usage to the contrary. Utbandi, a custom in Bengal, is a tenancy at will, which can be terminated by a verbal demand for possession. If we talk about usage, then there is a sharp contrast between the usage in Bombay and Punjab. In Bombay it is mandatory to serve a notice to quit at least a month before[13] whereas in Punjab, the notice period is 15 days.In the case of Surendranath Satkar v. Poornachandra Mukherji[14], the court held thatUtbandi, a custom in Bengal, is a tenancy at will, which can be terminated by a verbal demand for possession. If we talk about usage, then there is a sharp contrast between the usage in Bombay and Punjab. In Bombay it is mandatory to serve a notice to quit at least a month before[15] whereas in Punjab, the notice period is 15 days.[16]

For full procedure contact me on mobile through Vidhikarya.
Rate me Five Star *
Please visit the following link.

https://vidhikarya.com/LawyerRating/9506c43f5d0b2d266a07

Found Helpful
Found Helpful
Share this answerShare Icon
Reply Here

A. U should send legal notice through lawyer immediately

Found Helpful
Found Helpful
Share this answerShare Icon

Rameshwar Dadhe

Experience: 2 Year(s)

Responded 3 months ago

View All Answers
Reply Here
Categories
Administrative Law (470)
Adoption (125)
Advertising (59)
Animal Laws (40)
Arbitration and Medi... (50)
Aviation (16)
Banking (593)
Bankruptcy and Debt (201)
Cheque Bounce (424)
Child Custody (166)
Civil (2161)
Commercial (93)
Consumer Protection (583)
Contracts and Agreem... (490)
Corporate and Incorp... (114)
Criminal (1692)
Customs, Excise (42)
Cyber, Internet, Inf... (354)
Debt and Lending Agr... (79)
Debt Collection (178)
Divorce (667)
Divorce and Separati... (1602)
Documentation (316)
Domestic Violence (645)
Election Campaign an... (23)
Employment and Labou... (1172)
Environment and Natu... (31)
Equipment Finance an... (3)
Family (2060)
Financial Markets an... (101)
Government Contracts (57)
Human Rights (278)
Immigration (56)
Industrial Laws (66)
Insurance (81)
Intellectual Propert... (111)
International Laws (12)
IT Contracts (54)
Juvenile (17)
Landlord and Tenant (630)
Licensing (21)
Mail Fraud (18)
Maternity (61)
Media, Communication... (16)
Mergers and Acquisit... (20)
Military Laws (17)
Motor Accident (145)
Muslim Laws (60)
Outsourcing Agreemen... (5)
Partnership (64)
Police Laws (64)
Power of Attorney (75)
Privacy (97)
Property (3038)
Real Estate (433)
Registration (139)
RTI (111)
Sale (61)
Sale of Goods (20)
Sex Crime (142)
Sexual Harassment (6)
Sexual Harassment at... (69)
Software License (4)
Tax (19)
Tax-GST (11)
Tax-Income Tax (26)
Tax-Property Tax (35)
Telecommunication (13)
Torts (22)
Transportation (64)
Trust and Society (N... (89)
Will (144)
Work Permits (33)
Talk to a Lawyer
Post Your Matter
Request Callback
Contact Us