Landlord, Tenant and Rent: Questions and Answers

Check three things. First, the rent: the Act does not apply to premises let at more than Rs 3,500 a month (Section 3(c)), which takes almost every tenancy created in the last thirty years outside it. Second, the area: the Act covers the urban areas it has been extended to, not every village in Delhi. Third, exemptions such as government premises. A tenancy outside the Act is governed by the lease, the Transfer of Property Act 1882 and an ordinary civil suit. Our guide on tenants' rights under the Rent Control Act explains the protected side.

Possibly, but only on a ground the Act recognises. A protected tenant cannot be removed just because the tenancy is old or the rent is absurdly low. Section 14 lists the grounds: bona fide need of the landlord, arrears after notice, subletting, misuse, substantial damage and a few more. Most old shops in Old Delhi come back either through a bona fide need petition or a negotiated surrender where the tenant is paid to leave. Read our guide on evicting a tenant for personal need.

End the tenancy properly, then sue for possession. If the lease has not already expired by its own term, send a notice to quit under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, which means 15 days for a month-to-month tenancy. Then file a suit for possession and mesne profits in the civil court. These suits are generally valued on the annual rent, so most are filed in the district court, not the High Court. Our page on commercial tenancy and mesne profits suits explains the route up to the High Court in appeal.

Yes, if the need is genuine and you have no other reasonably suitable premises. Section 14(1)(e) was originally limited to residential use, but after Satyawati Sharma v. Union of India (2008) it covers shops and offices too. The need of a family member dependent on you, such as a son starting a business, is a common ground. The petition must say what the son will do there and why your other properties will not serve. A vague line like 'I need it for my family' rarely survives a leave to defend application.

It runs under the summary procedure in Section 25B. The Rent Controller issues summons in a special form, and the tenant must file an affidavit asking for leave to defend within 15 days of being served. If he does not, the landlord's statements are treated as admitted and an eviction order follows. If he does, the Controller decides on the affidavits whether there is a triable issue. Only if leave is granted does the case go to evidence, and even then it is meant to move faster than an ordinary suit.

Facts, backed by papers, that would defeat the landlord's case if proved. Bare denials like 'the need is not bona fide' get leave refused. Useful facts include other vacant premises with the landlord, a recent sale or letting of another portion, the family member already settled elsewhere, or a real dispute over who the landlord is. Attach what supports it: property tax records, photographs, sale deeds, a newspaper advertisement for letting. The Controller decides the leave stage on affidavits alone, so this is the tenant's main chance.

No. The Supreme Court held in Prithipal Singh v. Satpal Singh (2010) that the Rent Controller has no power to condone delay in filing for leave to defend under Section 25B. The 15 days run from proper service of the summons in the prescribed form. So the only real opening for a late tenant is to show that service was never validly made, for example a summons pasted at the wrong address. Inspect the service report in the Controller's file before doing anything else.

Whether the Rent Controller's order is according to law. There is no appeal against a Section 25B eviction order; the remedy is a revision to the High Court, filed within 90 days. The High Court does not reweigh the evidence as an appeal court would. It checks whether leave to defend was refused despite a real triable issue, whether a relevant fact was ignored, or whether the law was misapplied. Our page on eviction revisions in the Delhi High Court covers grounds that work and those that do not.

Not before six months from the date of the order. Section 14(7) stops a landlord from getting possession earlier when eviction is ordered on the bona fide need ground. Tenants often treat these six months as spare time and file the revision in the last week. That is a mistake, because the High Court may not list the matter in time to pass an interim order. File early, with the certified copy of the order and copies of the full Controller's record. Listing dates and case status are on the Delhi High Court's own website.

Yes. Once an eviction order is passed, the tenant's right to stay on at the old rent is in doubt, and the Supreme Court held in Atma Ram Properties v. Federal Motors (2005) that the court can make a stay conditional on paying use and occupation charges close to market rent. If the revision fails, the landlord keeps that money. If it succeeds, the court decides what happens to the excess. Missing a payment usually means the stay goes. Budget for this before you file.

Often, if you ask for it honestly. The High Court and the Supreme Court frequently grant a few months to vacate on the tenant's undertaking to hand over peaceful possession by a fixed date, pay use and occupation charges and not part with possession meanwhile. Treat that undertaking as final. Breaching it is contempt of court, and the landlord can execute the order at once. If you want to try the Supreme Court first, read our page on a special leave petition from Delhi.

Yes, under Section 14(1)(a), but follow the steps in order. First send a written notice of demand for the arrears. If the tenant does not pay within two months of receiving it, file the eviction petition. The Controller will then order him under Section 15 to deposit the arrears and keep paying monthly, and if he fails, his defence can be struck out. A tenant who pays as ordered escapes eviction, but he gets that benefit only once for the same premises if he again defaults for three months in a row.

Keep paying in a way you can prove. Send the rent by bank transfer or money order every month and keep the receipts. If you are a protected tenant and the landlord still refuses, or there is doubt about who the landlord is, you can deposit the rent with the Rent Controller under Section 27 of the Act, which counts as payment. Tenants outside the Act should pay by a traceable mode and, if a suit is filed, offer to deposit the rent in court. Cash with no receipt is how arrears cases are lost.

If you are a tenant under the Rent Control Act, apply to the Rent Controller under Section 45, which bars a landlord from cutting off or withholding essential supplies. The Controller can order interim restoration while the application is pending. If you are outside the Act, file a civil suit for injunction with an urgent application in the district court. Either way, write to the discom and the SHO the same day and keep copies, because those records carry weight when the matter is heard.

No. Even a tenant whose tenancy has ended, or one outside the Rent Act, can be removed only by due process of law. Locking him out or throwing out his goods can lead to a police complaint for criminal trespass or wrongful restraint against you, and a civil court will often restore his possession first and hear the dispute later. It also wins him sympathy at every later hearing. Send notice, file the right case, and ask the court for interim use and occupation charges.

Yes. Section 14(1)(b) allows eviction where the tenant has sublet, assigned or otherwise parted with possession of the whole or part of the premises without the landlord's written consent. The hard part is proof, since the two will claim to be partners or say the newcomer is an employee. Courts look at who really controls the space. Collect the sign board, GST registration, bills addressed to the newcomer and photographs before you send any notice, because evidence tends to disappear once the tenant is alerted.

Yes, for its term. A lease from year to year, or for more than a year, must be registered under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act and the Registration Act, which is why most Delhi rent agreements stop at 11 months. The agreement still has to carry proper stamp duty; an under-stamped document can be impounded and admitted in evidence only after paying the duty and a penalty. Renewing the agreement on fresh paper every 11 months is common and lawful.

It depends on the substance, not the heading on the document. Courts ask what the parties really intended and whether the occupant got exclusive possession, an approach the Supreme Court set out in Associated Hotels of India v. R.N. Kapoor (1959). Monthly payment and keys point towards tenancy but do not settle it. A licensee has no interest in the property and must leave once the licence is revoked. The label matters most for old premises, where a tenancy could carry Rent Act protection.

Revoke the licence in writing, then file a suit for possession and mandatory injunction with a claim for use and occupation charges. A caretaker, servant or relative allowed in out of kindness holds possession on the owner's behalf, and the Supreme Court said in Maria Margarida Sequeira Fernandes (2012) that such a person gets no right to stay. Delhi courts can decide these suits quickly when the documents are clear. Do not change the locks while he is inside. Our guide on removing an illegal occupant sets out the steps.

Mesne profits are what a person in wrongful possession earned, or could have earned with ordinary care, from the property (Section 2(12) of the Code of Civil Procedure). Against an overstaying tenant they are usually measured at the market rent of similar premises nearby, from the date the tenancy ended, often with interest. Prove them with registered leases of comparable shops, a valuer's evidence and current listings. The court can also order interim use and occupation charges while the suit is pending. See our guide on mesne profits.

Often not. Where the tenant admits the landlord and tenant relationship, a rent above Rs 3,500 and receipt of the notice to quit, Delhi courts regularly pass a decree for possession on admissions under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure without waiting for evidence. The claim for mesne profits then goes to trial on its own. Admissions can come from the written statement, from the tenant's reply to your notice, or from earlier documents he signed.

Usually not. Since the 2002 amendment, Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act says a notice is not invalid just because the period mentioned falls short, so long as the suit is filed after the required period from the notice. The Supreme Court has also accepted that filing an eviction suit can itself operate as notice to quit (Nopany Investments v. Santokh Singh, 2008). Still, send a clean notice by registered post and email and keep the delivery proof.

Send a legal notice first, then file a recovery suit in the district court for the area. A written agreement that records the deposit and the duty to refund it can support a summary suit under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, where the landlord must get leave to defend. The Delhi High Court hears money suits on its original side only above Rs 2 crore at present, and a proposal to raise that limit is pending, so check it. Our guide on pecuniary jurisdiction explains which court hears what.

Only what you can justify. You may deduct unpaid rent, unpaid electricity and water bills, and the cost of damage beyond ordinary wear and tear. A clause forfeiting the deposit for leaving during a lock-in is judged as compensation under Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act, so only a reasonable amount is recoverable, and only if the lease itself is enforceable. Take dated photographs at handover and give the tenant a written account of each deduction. A blanket refusal invites a recovery suit with interest.

Usually not. A lease that the law requires to be registered cannot be used to prove its terms if it is unregistered (Section 49 of the Registration Act), and the tenancy is then treated as month to month, ending on notice. Courts may look at the document for a collateral purpose, such as the nature of possession, but a lock-in clause in it is generally hard to enforce. A landlord who wants a binding lock-in should register the lease, even though registration costs more.

Not by itself. The question is whether the other accommodation is reasonably suitable for the specific need, and the landlord's choice gets weight when it is honest. What sinks petitions is concealment. When Advocate B.K. Singh drafts a bona fide need petition, he lists every property the family owns, including those in a wife's or HUF's name, and explains in a line or two why each one does not fit. A property the tenant digs out that you never mentioned is often enough to get him leave to defend.

Not yet. Section 14(6) bars a landlord who acquired the premises by transfer from seeking eviction on the ground of bona fide need until five years have passed from the date of acquisition. The aim is to stop people buying tenanted property cheaply and evicting at once. Inheritance is not a transfer for this purpose, so an heir can file straight away. Other grounds, such as arrears or subletting, are not affected by the five-year bar.

Yes, once you have notice of the transfer. Under Section 109 of the Transfer of Property Act, the buyer steps into the old landlord's shoes and the tenancy continues on the same terms. Ask for a copy of the sale deed, or at least a letter from the old landlord confirming the sale, and keep paying by bank transfer to the right person. The sale does not end your tenancy, and if you are a protected tenant the buyer faces the five-year bar in Section 14(6) before seeking eviction for bona fide need.

Yes, within limits. Section 6A of the Act lets the landlord increase the agreed rent by 10 per cent every three years, and the increase takes effect only after written notice to the tenant. Beyond that, the route is fixation of standard rent before the Rent Controller, which rarely helps owners much. Many landlords of old tenancies never send the notice and lose decades of increases they were entitled to. Send it by registered post and keep the proof of delivery.

For a shop or other commercial premises under the Act, usually yes. The Supreme Court held in Gian Devi Anand v. Jeevan Kumar (1985) that a statutory tenancy of commercial premises passes to the tenant's heirs. For residential premises, the definition of tenant in Section 2(l) of the Act limits who can continue after the tenant's death and for how long, depending on who lived with him and who depended on him. Read that definition against your family's facts before assuming either way.

No. Pagri paid at the start of a tenancy does not create ownership or a right to stay forever. The Rent Control Act itself treats taking a premium for letting as unlawful, so the tenant cannot use the payment as a legal shield. In practice, though, pagri often comes up in settlement talks for old shops in Chandni Chowk and Sadar Bazar, where many surrenders happen for an agreed sum. Eviction still needs a Section 14 ground or a surrender recorded in writing.

This often helps the landlord. A tenant cannot deny the title of the landlord who let him in while the tenancy lasts, under the rule of tenant estoppel in Section 116 of the old Evidence Act, carried into the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. Claiming title in himself can also forfeit the lease under Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act. And a GPA with an agreement to sell does not pass title after Suraj Lamp (2011). Our guide on tenants claiming ownership covers the related arguments.

Possibly. Section 19 of the Act stops a landlord who got possession on the ground of bona fide need from letting the premises to anyone else within three years without the Rent Controller's permission. If he does, the former tenant can apply to the Controller for restoration of possession. Move fast and gather proof of the new letting: the new sign board, a GST registration at the address, photographs of the new occupant, and the date the new business opened.

No. Orders passed outside the Section 25B summary procedure go first to the Rent Control Tribunal in appeal under Section 38, within 30 days. A second appeal lies to the Delhi High Court under Section 39 only on a substantial question of law. Filing a revision where an appeal lies, or the other way round, wastes months. When Advocate B.K. Singh takes up a rent file, the first thing he checks is the section under which the Controller passed the order, because that decides the forum and the deadline.

It depends on which law governs the tenancy. In Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading Corporation (2020), the Supreme Court held that landlord and tenant disputes under the Transfer of Property Act can go to arbitration, but disputes covered by a rent control law cannot. So for a commercial lease outside the Delhi Rent Control Act, the tenant can ask the court to refer the eviction dispute to arbitration, provided he applies before filing his first statement on the merits. See our page on arbitration petitions in the Delhi High Court.

Yes, on a properly attested power of attorney, apostilled or attested at an Indian mission. But bona fide need is about your own plans, and the Supreme Court held in Janki Vashdeo Bhojwani v. IndusInd Bank (2005) that a power of attorney holder cannot give evidence on facts only the principal knows. So you will usually file your own affidavit, which can be sworn abroad, and give evidence by video if the case goes to trial. Advocate B.K. Singh can go through your papers in an online consultation.

As far as we know, no. The Delhi Rent Act 1995 received assent but was never brought into force, so the Delhi Rent Control Act 1958 still governs protected tenancies. The Model Tenancy Act 2021 is only a model law; it applies in a state or Union Territory once that government enacts or adopts it, and Delhi had not done so as of October 2026. Check the current position before drafting an agreement that relies on either law.