A landlord is the best judge of his requirement while seeking to evict a tenant from his premises and courts cannot dictate to him how and in what manner he should live, the Supreme Court has held.
A vacation Bench comprising Justice B.S. Chauhan and Justice Swatanter Kumar said: “If the landlord wishes to live with comfort in a house of his own, the law does not command or compel him to squeeze himself and dwell in lesser premises so as to protect the tenant's continued occupation in tenancy premises.
“However, the bona fide requirement of the landlord must be distinguished from a mere whim or fanciful desire. It must be manifested in actual need so as to convince the court that it is not a mere fanciful or whimsical desire.”
Writing the judgment, Justice Chauhan said: “The need should be bona fide and not arbitrary, and the requirement pleaded and proved must neither be a pretext nor a ruse adopted by the landlord for evicting the tenant. Therefore, the court must take relevant circumstances into consideration while determining the issue of bona fide need so that the protection afforded to a tenant is not rendered illusory or whittled down.”
The Bench said: “The landlord's desire for possession, however honest it might otherwise be, has, inevitably, a subjective element in it.
The ‘desire,' to become ‘requirement,' must have the objective element of a ‘need' which can be decided only by taking all relevant circumstances into consideration.”
‘Strike a balance'
Citing an earlier ruling, the Bench emphasised the need for social legislations like the Rent Control Act striking a balance between rival interests so as to be just to the law.
“The law ought not to be unjust to one and give a disproportionate benefit or protection to another section of society,” it said.
Second appeal
The Bench added that the High Court should not entertain a second appeal unless it raised a substantial question of law, not merely on facts.
“It is not permissible for the High Court to decide the second appeal by re-appreciating the evidence as if it was deciding the first appeal unless it comes to the conclusion that the findings recorded by the court below were perverse,” it said.
In the instant case, the appellant, Dinesh Kumar, challenged the Madhya Pradesh High Court's order allowing the application of the respondent landlord, Yusuf Ali, for his eviction.
The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal taking into consideration the fact that the appellant had been a tenant for over three decades.
It held that the landlord could recover possession of half of the area of the rented premises, leaving the other half to the tenant.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Friday, April 23, 2010
Rent Control Act
With the inflation and free market economy in place, the government is not exercising any control over prices or on the middleman from making money in the market. The government is further allowing every sector like transportation (bus fair), price of essential commodities to go up. It is true that purchasing power of the people are also increasing. Wages and salary are increasing.
Then Why is the Landlord’s hands being tied to keep the rent at a historic level. Due to colonial Rent Control Act that was in place in the 1960s, the rent is freezed at historic level.
Black money is generated by key money or pakidi, this also is a natural outcome of Rent Control Act.
The state of Kerala has not yet passed a Rent Control Act in tune with Model Rent Control Act proposed by the Central Ministry of Urban Development. The Memorandum of Understanding entered into by the state of Kerala and JNNURM (Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission) also stipulates that a new Rent Control Act should be promulgated to balance the interest of Landlords and tenants.
The Landlords are not able to pay any money to the lobbies, hence no lobbies are there to help them or to pass an Act to safeguard their fundamental rights. The courts at various occasions defended building owners, (landlords) within their limited sphere.
Poor landlords living on small rentals are getting poorer and have to sell off their properties to the tenants. Atleast it is better than trying to evict the Tenant, which may take another 15 years in the courts. And the best part is that the Tenant Lobby is so strong that even if the case of the tenant is weak, he still continues to sit on the property with various methods adopted at court to make the landlord to sell out his property. Tenants adopt various Methods to delay the court proceedings and the Landlords are being forced to sell out their properties at heavy losses to any purchaser who is ready to buy property the possession of which is in the hands of the tenants.
Let market conditions generate rental rates in the market. Why should there be a rent control act. The Government allows the hike in bus fair or price of essential commodities.
The rent rates will also become stable by market forces in the Free market economy. Give that a chance. Remove the Rent Control Act and watch the difference. The curious fact is that government property is not covered by rent control act, the buildings which are let out by the government are not controlled by the rent control act, the rent control act is to control rent of the poor landlords only.
When the rent control act is repealed new buildings with better facilities will crop up, and rate of rent will go down. Tenants will get better accommodation at a cheaper rate. The only affected sector will be tenants who posses the buildings at a very low rates and who are not willing to increase their rate of rent in tune with modern times.
Then Why is the Landlord’s hands being tied to keep the rent at a historic level. Due to colonial Rent Control Act that was in place in the 1960s, the rent is freezed at historic level.
Black money is generated by key money or pakidi, this also is a natural outcome of Rent Control Act.
The state of Kerala has not yet passed a Rent Control Act in tune with Model Rent Control Act proposed by the Central Ministry of Urban Development. The Memorandum of Understanding entered into by the state of Kerala and JNNURM (Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission) also stipulates that a new Rent Control Act should be promulgated to balance the interest of Landlords and tenants.
The Landlords are not able to pay any money to the lobbies, hence no lobbies are there to help them or to pass an Act to safeguard their fundamental rights. The courts at various occasions defended building owners, (landlords) within their limited sphere.
Poor landlords living on small rentals are getting poorer and have to sell off their properties to the tenants. Atleast it is better than trying to evict the Tenant, which may take another 15 years in the courts. And the best part is that the Tenant Lobby is so strong that even if the case of the tenant is weak, he still continues to sit on the property with various methods adopted at court to make the landlord to sell out his property. Tenants adopt various Methods to delay the court proceedings and the Landlords are being forced to sell out their properties at heavy losses to any purchaser who is ready to buy property the possession of which is in the hands of the tenants.
Let market conditions generate rental rates in the market. Why should there be a rent control act. The Government allows the hike in bus fair or price of essential commodities.
The rent rates will also become stable by market forces in the Free market economy. Give that a chance. Remove the Rent Control Act and watch the difference. The curious fact is that government property is not covered by rent control act, the buildings which are let out by the government are not controlled by the rent control act, the rent control act is to control rent of the poor landlords only.
When the rent control act is repealed new buildings with better facilities will crop up, and rate of rent will go down. Tenants will get better accommodation at a cheaper rate. The only affected sector will be tenants who posses the buildings at a very low rates and who are not willing to increase their rate of rent in tune with modern times.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Balanced Rent Control Legislation
The inflation has not affected rent hike due to rent control Act. The building owner is not getting his due. The inflation affects tenants and owner of the building, the tenant enjoys the property at present while he pays only the price fixed at a time when the money is not devalued. The advantage of devaluation of money is reaped by the tenant. The tenants are taking undue advantage of the building owner by not giving his proper remuneration.
Tenants are living off the Landlords like leeches live off the blood of humans once they catch hold of their host creature.
Free market economy will determine the right price. Abundant supply of houses and buildings to the rental market will reduce the rent, and buildings with better facilities will be available in the market. Proper maintenance of buildings will be ensured.
The tenant has to pay rent at the present rate. The Government is trying to hold rent steady, where as prices of all other articles are fixed rationally or let come to a reasonable rate by market force. The government cannot hold prices of any article let alone rental.
It would be easier for tenants to find another building if there were more properties available on rent. Today there are none, because tenants who are able to acquire it earlier is squatting on them and no new buildings are coming to the rental market due to fear of losing the building along with land. Hence land is lying idle or even if buildings are built, it is lying vacant or is sold at a sky high price which common man cannot afford, else high premium has to be paid, that too in black money and without receipt because taking premium is illegal.
The landlord should be given his due, his genuine remuneration should be paid by the tenant, Let market conditions determine the rent rates. A willing tenant pays to a landlord for a building with similar facilities. Otherwise it is or terrorism on the part of the tenant to sit on the Landlord.
Tenants are living off the Landlords like leeches live off the blood of humans once they catch hold of their host creature.
Free market economy will determine the right price. Abundant supply of houses and buildings to the rental market will reduce the rent, and buildings with better facilities will be available in the market. Proper maintenance of buildings will be ensured.
The tenant has to pay rent at the present rate. The Government is trying to hold rent steady, where as prices of all other articles are fixed rationally or let come to a reasonable rate by market force. The government cannot hold prices of any article let alone rental.
It would be easier for tenants to find another building if there were more properties available on rent. Today there are none, because tenants who are able to acquire it earlier is squatting on them and no new buildings are coming to the rental market due to fear of losing the building along with land. Hence land is lying idle or even if buildings are built, it is lying vacant or is sold at a sky high price which common man cannot afford, else high premium has to be paid, that too in black money and without receipt because taking premium is illegal.
The landlord should be given his due, his genuine remuneration should be paid by the tenant, Let market conditions determine the rent rates. A willing tenant pays to a landlord for a building with similar facilities. Otherwise it is or terrorism on the part of the tenant to sit on the Landlord.
Rent Control Kerala
The courts are trying to protect the rights of the landlord but the legislature which is bound by the direction of the central government to make a rent control act which balance the interests of tenants and building owners are not taking any action
Monday, April 19, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
