TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1887X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missible to create a valid lease for a renewed term of nine years. In this background, this Court held that the defendants were tenants holding over under Section 116 in which event it was necessary for the plaintiff to serve a notice under Section 106. In the absence of such a notice, the suit, it was held, would not be maintainable. In the present case, there is an express admission on the part of the defendants that they were in occupation under the lease agreement for a period of fifteen years with effect from 1981 and that the period of lease expired on 24 May 1996. Such a specific admission on the part of the defendants is contained in paragraph 22 of the written statement. Under Section 111(a), a lease of immovable property determines by efflux of time limited thereby. Once this be the position, there can be no manner of doubt that the position of the respondent on the expiration of the lease was of a tenant at sufferance. In the circumstances, there was no necessity of a notice for the termination of the lease under the provisions of Section 106. The respondent having squarely admitted in its written statement that it was in occupation for a term of fifteen years, that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acant and peaceful possession. A preliminary decree for mesne profits was passed. The respondent filed an appeal before the High Court. By an interim order dated 18 May 2006, the Division Bench of the High Court directed that proceedings before the trial Court for ascertainment of mesne profits in terms of Order 1 Title Suit 63 of 2001 XX Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 CPC shall continue, but no final decree shall be drawn up without the leave of the Court. The execution proceedings were stayed, subject to deposit of the arrears of rent. 8 Following the order of the High Court, the valuer submitted a report in regard to the valuation of the property. The trial Court accepted the valuation on 7 September 2016. The order of the trial court was challenged by the respondent before the High Court CO 456 of 2017. The petition was dismissed on 1 May 2018 by a learned Single Judge. 9 By a judgment and order dated 14 November 2018, the High Court has set aside the decree for possession and, in consequence, directed that the suit instituted by the respondent shall stand dismissed. The High Court has held that: (i) A lease of immovable property for a term exceeding one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led an appeal before the Division Bench. In this view of the matter, the respondent must be treated to have elected or opted out of the lease. 11 On the other hand, Mr Yasobant Das, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, urged that: (i) Since the document of lease has not been registered, the contents of the lease cannot be looked into for any purpose whatsoever. (ii) The status of the respondent would be of a monthly tenant; (iii) Consequently, a notice of termination under Section 106 was mandatory; and (iv) The failure of the appellant to issue a notice of termination under Section 106 was fatal to the maintainability of the suit. In this regard, reliance was placed on a decision of a two judge Bench of this Court in Satish Chand Makhan v Govardhan Das Byas (1984) 1 SCC 369. 12 Section 107 of the TP Act reads thus: 107. Leases how made.-A lease of immovable property from year to year, or for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent, can be made only by a registered instrument. All other leases of immovable property may be made either by a registered instrument or by oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possessio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tinguish, whether in present or in future, any right, title or interest, whether vested or contingent, of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, to or in immovable property: 49. Effect of non-registration of documents required to be registered.-No document required by Section 17 or by any provision of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), to be registered shall- (a) affect any immovable property comprised therein, or (b) confer any power to adopt, or (c) be received as evidence of any transaction affecting such property or conferring such power, unless it has been registered: Provided that an unregistered document affecting immovable property and required by this Act or the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), to be registered may be received as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance under Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 (1 of 1877) or as evidence of any collateral transaction not required to be effected by registered instrument. The only purpose for which the lease can be looked at is for assessing the nature and character of the possession of the respondent. 14 The essence of the dispute in the present cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in occupation under the lease agreement for a period of fifteen years with effect from 1981 and that the period of lease expired on 24 May 1996. Such a specific admission on the part of the defendants is contained in paragraph 22 of the written statement. Under Section 111(a), a lease of immovable property determines by efflux of time limited thereby. Once this be the position, there can be no manner of doubt that the position of the respondent on the expiration of the lease was of a tenant at sufferance. In the circumstances, there was no necessity of a notice for the termination of the lease under the provisions of Section 106. The respondent having squarely admitted in its written statement that it was in occupation for a term of fifteen years, that term having expired, the lease stood determined by efflux of time. Once the lease stood determined by efflux of time, there was no necessity for a notice of termination under Section 106. 16 In coming to this conclusion, we are fortified by the decision of this Court in R V Bhupal Prasad v State of A P(1995) 5 SCC 698, where this Court held: 8.Tenant at sufferance is one who comes into possession of land by lawful title, but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered agreement, the court is not precluded from determining the factum of tenancy from other evidence on the record including the conduct of parties. However, in the absence of registration, Section 106 created a fiction of tenancy from month to month, the termination of which was governed by Section 106. Consequently, the judgment of the High Court was set aside and the judgment of the trial court was restored. The above judgment is clearly distinguishable. Since the agreement of sublease in Park Street Properties (supra) was unregistered, clause 6 which governed the sub-lease could not be looked into. In the present case, the indenture of lease being unregistered, the contents of the instrument are inadmissible in evidence. However, it is evident from the clear admission in the written statement that the appellant accepted and proceeded on the basis that the period of lease expired on 24 May 1996. Thereafter, the position of the appellant is of a tenant at sufferance. In Nopany Investments (P) Ltd v Santokh Singh (HUF) (2008) 2 SCC 728, a two judge Bench of this Court has held : 22 In any view of the matter, it is well settled that filing of an eviction suit under the general ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|