TENANCY AGREEMENT OF TNRRRLT ACT 2017 AND ITS ROLE IN BUILDING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LANDLORD AND TENANT AND IN RESOLVING TENACY DISPUTES BY - MS. DEEPIKA MURALI, MR. HARIGARAN S & MR. MAHALINGAM V
TENANCY
AGREEMENT OF TNRRRLT ACT 2017 AND ITS ROLE IN BUILDING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LANDLORD AND TENANT AND
IN RESOLVING TENACY DISPUTES
AUTHORED BY
- MS. DEEPIKA MURALI,
MR. HARIGARAN S & MR. MAHALINGAM
V
School of Law, SRM Institute of
Science and Technology
Abstract:
This article provides a critical
analysis of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of
Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017, particularly on the newly introduced tenancy
agreement. The 2017 Act, aim to streamline rental arrangements, enhance
transparency, and minimize disputes between landlords and tenants. It aims to
create a balanced framework for landlord-tenant relationships in the state. The
Act addresses the challenges posed by longstanding disputes over rights and
responsibilities, focusing on eviction processes, rent control, and tenant
protection. By examining the key provisions of the Act, the article focuses on
how such provisions are effective in contracting the tenancy agreement and how
the adjudication process has been streamlined and the disputes are being
resolved based on the agreed terms and conditions of the agreement. Ultimately,
this article aims to contribute to the discourse on housing rights and
landlord-tenant relations in India, suggesting pathways for enhancing the
effectiveness of the 2017 Act to foster a more just and equitable housing
environment.
Keywords: Tenancy Agreement, Tenant, Landlord,
Rent Authority, Rent Court, Rent Tribunal, Repossession of premises
Introduction:
The Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights
and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (hereafter TNRRRLT Act,
2017), was enacted in response to the growing complexities and disputes
surrounding landlord-tenant relationships in the state. Historically, these
relationships have often been characterized by imbalance, with tenants
frequently facing eviction, harassment, and lack of adequate legal protections.
Traditional laws governing tenancy, including the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease
and Rent Control) Act, 1960, often failed to address the evolving
socio-economic realities and the needs of a rapidly urbanizing population. The
1960 Act lacked effective mechanisms for resolving disputes, often resulting in
prolonged legal battles.
The TNRRRLT Act, 2017 was introduced
to create a more equitable legal framework that regulates the rights and
responsibilities of both landlords and tenants through a tenancy agreement and
registering it with the concerned authority. By doing so, it aims to promote
stability in rental housing, reduce disputes, and ensure a fair process for
eviction and rent regulation. The Act reflects a broader trend in Indian
housing policy towards recognizing the importance of tenant rights while also accommodating
landlords' interests.
This article critically analyzes the
Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants
Act, 2017, exploring its provisions, implications, and overall effectiveness in
addressing the challenges faced by both landlords and tenants. The Act seeks to
modernize rental laws and provide a comprehensive framework for resolving
disputes, establishing rent, and managing eviction processes through a tenancy
agreement.
The introduction of this legislation
represents a significant shift in the legal landscape of housing in Tamil Nadu,
as it aims to create a more predictable and transparent environment for rental
transactions. Key provisions includes the introduction of a separate written
tenancy agreement, clear grounds for eviction, and a streamlined dispute
resolution process. By analyzing case studies, stakeholder perspectives, and
existing legal challenges, this article aims to provide a nuanced understanding
of the Act's contributions and limitations in the broader context of housing
rights and landlord-tenant relations in Tamil Nadu.
Object and
Reason for enacting TNRRLT Act, 2017:
The old Tenancy Act, 1960 loaded
heavily against the landlord and present enactment was passed with the object
of balancing the rights and responsibilities of both landlord and tenant on
equal footing. In order to advance that object S. 4(2) of TNRRRLT Act,
2017 mandates that the parties to the erstwhile tenancy should enter into
a new written agreement under the provisions of the TNRRRLT Act, 2017. In the case of S.R.
Venkatesh v R. Jayakumar the
court held that the act wanted to give primacy to rental agreements and failure
to register such agreements will become a ground for eviction. “Only with that
object in mind legislature had given grace period of 575 days to the parties to
enter into written agreement under the Act.”[1]
Key
Provisions of TNRRRLT Act, 2017 in relation to tenancy agreement:
·
S.4
& S.4-A - Tenancy Agreement & Effect of non-registration
·
S.8
- Rent payable
·
S.
21- Repossession of the premises by the landlord
·
S.30
– Appeals
·
S.
31- Constitution of Rent Court.
·
S.
32- Constitution of Rent Tribunals
·
S.
38- Appointment of Rent Authority
Research
Questions:
1. Whether provision of ‘tenancy
agreement’ u/S.4 of the TNRRLT Act 2017 is effective in resolving disputes and
whether the act is balancing the rights and responsibilities of the landlord
and tenant?
2. Whether the adjudication process
provided in the Act by constituting hierarchy of courts, addresses the disputes
between landlord and tenant amicably?
Role of
Tenancy Agreement:
The tenancy agreement plays a very
important role in the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights & Responsibilities of
Landlords & Tenants Act, 2017 (herein after TNRRRLT ACT,2017). Only through
such an agreement, the fixation of rent, the rights and responsibilities of both
landlord and tenants can be interpreted. Chapter II of the Act is legislated on
‘Tenancy’. It is also to be noted that in 2018, S.4 of TRRRLT Act, 2017 was
substituted via an amendment[2].
S.4(1) of the Act states that, “Notwithstanding anything contained in this
Act or any other law for the time being in force, no person shall, after the
commencement of this Act, let or take on rent any premises except by an
agreement in writing.”[3] It
is also further to be noted that the fixation of rent can be done by mutual
agreement between the landlord and tenant under S.8 of TNRRRLT Act, 2017.
Fixation of
Rent:
In the earlier tenancy act i.e.,
Tamil Nadu (Lease and Control) Act, 1960 (herein after Tenancy Act 1960)[4]
fixation of fair rent was provided under S.4 of the Tenancy Act 1960. This act
was repealed and subsequently the TNRRRLT Act 2017 was enacted. It S.8 of the
TNRRRLT Act 2017, provides for rent payable. The rent payable in relation to
a premises shall be,— (a) in case of new tenancies entered into after the
commencement of this Act, the rent agreed to between the landlord and the
tenant at the commencement of the tenancy; (b) in case of tenancies entered
into before the commencement of this Act, where no agreement was executed
between the parties, the rent agreed to between the landlord and the tenant in
the agreement executed between them under sub-section (2) of section 4. S.8 of
the Act was further substituted through an amendment in 2018. The fixation
of rent in now only through mutual agreement. No specific procedure is provided.
Under S.9 of TNRRLT Act, 2017[5] Revision
of rent between the landlord and the tenant shall be as per the terms set out
in the tenancy agreement. The landlord must give notice to the tenant
regarding the revised rent and if silence is maintained by the tenant on this
regard, the tenant is deemed to accept the revised rent. Point is also to be
noted that the revised rent can be done only after the end of the tenancy. If
any revision is to be done during the tenancy period, it must be explicitly
mentioned in the agreement. Thus, the main intention behind the repeal of “fair
rent of fixation” and fixation of rent only through agreements in the new Act
was done as concerns were shown that the market values of properties keep
changing and it is difficult to fix a fair price. So, the TNRRRLT Act, 2017,
provides for market-oriented approach by leaving the fixation of rent amount on
parties, who may fix or revise it considering the current market value of the
premises and thereby increasing the possibilities of high rate of return to the
investors in the rental housing markets.
In one of the features advantageous
for tenants, the new Act restricts the advance amount that landlords can
collect up to three months’ rent under S.11 of the TNRRRLT Act, 2017. The
advance of rent was arbitrarily decided by the landlord with some charging as
much as 12 months’ rent.[6] To
avoid this the act has clearly mentioned the collection of advance rent as
security deposit by specified manner in the Act.
Contingencies
arising through tenancy agreement:
In the case of S.R.Venkatesh v R.
Jayakumar[7] by
Hon’ble Madras High Court, contingency arising in tenancy agreement was
enumerated as below:
·
Written tenancy created prior to and expired prior to
the commencement of the Act (Tenant holding over under an oral tenancy);
·
Oral tenancies created prior to the New Act and no
written agreement entered into;
·
Written tenancies created prior to the New Act and the
period expired after the commencement of the Act;
·
Written tenancies entered after the commencement of
the New Act not registered but subsisting
·
Written tenancies created after the commencement of
the New Act and had presently expired (either registered or unregistered)
·
Oral tenancies created after the New Act.
As far as the first three
contingencies are concerned, all of them will be covered by Section 4(2) and
its proviso. Thus, the landlord would have the right to invoke Section 21(2)(a)
of the New Act. It was further held that Court below on correct appreciation of
the provisions under TNRRRLT Act came to a conclusion that in case of failure
of the landlord and tenant from entering into new written agreement as
contemplated by Section 4(2) of TNRRRLT Act 2017, the land lord is entitled to
seek re-possession of demised premises under Section 21(2)(a) of TNRRRLT Act.
S.4 (2) of the said Act deals with entering into the tenancy agreement in
respect of a tenancy, which had come into existence before the commencement of
the Act, and when there is no agreement in writing. This provision requires the
landlord and tenant to enter into an agreement in writing with regard to that
existing tenancy within a period of 575 days from the date of commencement of
this Act. Section 4(3) deals with the registration of the agreement entered
under Section 4 (1) and 4 (2) of the said Act and also the written agreement
entered into between the landlord and tenant before the commencement of this
Act.[8]
Written tenancies created after the commencement of the New Act and had
presently expired (either registered or unregistered) or if oral tenancies
created after the new Act are concerned in such cases, it was held in S. Muruganandam
vs J.Joseph[9]
that absence of a written agreement and the tenancy having expired, the
landlords cannot invoke the provisions of the New Act, but they will have to
resort to the general law.
Effect of Non-Registration: It was held in V.Manimegalai vs
Selvaraj Kannan[10] “Section 4(3) can only be construed that, by
virtue of the provisions of the Act, there must be a written agreement between
the landlord and tenant and that is compulsorily registerable and without being
a registered document in rental agreement, it does not have an evidentiary
value, in other words, it is inadmissible in evidence”. As contingency raised
in this regard, S.4-A was introduced in the 2018 amendment Act. Thus, the
effect of non-registration can be addressed through this section.
Deadlock in tenancy agreement: Often there are scenarios of deadlock
to arise in formulating a tenancy agreement as there is no clear procedure
mentioned in S. 4 of the new Act. In the
case of Dilip Solanki vs Kiran Kumari[11],
deadlock aroused in executing the agreement as the landlord increased the rent.
It was interpreted in the case of Ramesh Salinkhe Vs. Pramila Jain[12]
wherein at paragraph No.20, it has been held as follows:-
“The answer to the question is
clearly indicated in section 4 (2) of the TNRRRLT Act, 2017. Section 4 (2) of the TNRRRLT Act, 2017
requires the landlord and tenant to enter into an agreement in writing i.e.,
tenancy agreement with regard to that tenancy. "That tenancy"
As now there is clear deadlock
arising in fixation of rent, the court is of the view in Dilip Solanki vs Kiran
Kumari that legislature did not consciously create any mechanism to resolve the
dispute whenever there arises a dead lock in respect of execution of lease
agreement. Legislature is also conscious that in case, if lease agreement is
not executed for whatever may be the reason, the landlord can initiate the
proceedings for eviction against the tenants. The court further held, “legislature
must have thought that it is ultimately the call of the landlord and that the
landlord shall not be under the mercy of the tenants, in deciding the terms of
the lease”. Thus the court held that as there is no execution of a lease
agreement as required under S. 4(2) of the Act is irrespective of any
circumstance, the landlord is entitled to seek for eviction under Section 21 (2) (a) of the Act.
Repossession
and adjudication process:
Tenancy agreement, is the major
document, through which either repossession of the premises by the landlord or
any adjudication of disputes can take place. As per the provisions of this law,
all tenancy agreements should be written agreements and shall be compulsorily
register with the Rent Authority. The registration of the tenancy agreement
with the rent authority is independent of the registration requirement of the
tenancy agreement under the Registration act, 1908. Since, most of the
transactions are done through the tenancy registration portal with minimum
interface of the Rent Authority. The tenancy registration portal eases the
process of registration of the tenancy agreement with much convenience to the
general public.[13] In Mr. Vijayraj
Bhandari vs Mr. Suresh Kumar J[14],
the court held that Right to property is a Constitutional right under Article 300-(A) of the Constitution of India.
Property Right cannot be taken away without any authority of law. Landlord has
got an absolute right to deal with his property at his choice. Right of the
tenant is restricted only with reference to the terms and conditions of the
lease agreement agreed between the landlord and the tenant, which is a
contract. Thus, “the right of tenant is a Statutory right limited to the extent
of terms and conditions agreed between the parties in the contract”. Thus, no
tenant has got an enforceable right against the landlord for entering into an
agreement for tenancy or to dictate terms and conditions. The offer made either
by the tenant or by the landlord is to be accepted by the other party and shall
be reduced in writing. Absence of written tenancy agreement is a ground for eviction
under the New Act. The problem that might arise in adjudication is the absence
of tenancy agreement. The landlord and tenants to approach a rent authority or
any appellate tribunal, must register the agreement. It is to be noted that the
Madras High Court has directed all 38 Collectors in the State to ensure that
the tenancy agreements submitted either by the landlords or the tenants are
registered within 30 days from the date of submission, under the Tamil Nadu
Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act of 2017.
Justice S.M. Subramaniam said that any delay on the part of the district-level
officials, will cause inconvenience to the landlord and tenant while
approaching the rent courts for eviction or other relief. [15]
·
Constitution of Rent Court and Rent Tribunal:
Old tenancy Act 1960, only the civil
courts had the jurisdiction to adjudicate the rental disputes. But under the
new act, rent authority, rent court and rent tribunals were constituted
exclusively to settle any kinds of disputes arising between landlords and
tenants. The civil court are refrained from maintaining such matters. As there
is constitution of separate rental courts and tribunals the disputes can be
quickly resolved and the proceeding will be fast-tracked. S.33 of the Act
states that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time
being in force, in the areas to which this Act extends, only the Rent Court and
no Civil Court shall have jurisdiction, except the jurisdiction of Rent
Authority under section 39, to hear and decide the applications relating to
disputes between landlord and tenant and matters connected with and ancillary
thereto covered under this Act: Provided that the Rent Court shall, in deciding
such applications relating to tenancies and premises, give due regard to the
provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the Indian Contract Act, 1872
or any other substantive law applicable to such matter in the same manner, in
which such law would have been applied had the dispute been brought before a
Civil Court by way of suit.
S.30(1) of TNRRRLT Act, 2017 states that
an appeal shall lie against the order of the Rent Authority made under this Act
to the Rent Court having territorial jurisdiction. S.30 (2) An appeal under
sub-section (1) shall be preferred within thirty days from the date of the
order made by the Rent Authority. According to S.36(1) from every final
order passed by the Rent Court, an appeal shall lie to the Rent Tribunal,
within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the premises is situated and such
an appeal shall be filed within a period of thirty days from the date of final
order along with a copy of such final order.
·
Writ Jurisdiction:
In case of Lalith Kumar vs Pramila
Jain[16] it
was emphasised that scope of judicial interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
and high court cannot act as a court of appeal. It should not interfere in the
decision of the inferior Courts, unless there is manifest miscarriage of
justice. The aggrieved party can invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High Court
under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution only if the orders passed by the
rent tribunal is constitutionally invalid.
Thus, constituting hierarchy of
courts to resolve rental disputes offers several important benefits, ensuring
that cases are handled efficiently, fairly, and with proper legal
oversight.
Constitutional
Validity of the TNRRRLT Act, 2017 and
reading
down of S.4 and S.4-A:
The landlord and tenants both
challenged the provisions of the TNRRRLT Act, 2017. First Division Bench of
Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice D. Bharatha checking the
validity of the act held, “This law was not repugnant to any of the existing
Central laws”. Many writ petitions were disposed stating that the judges
overall, did not find any illegality in any of the provisions under challenge
except for the necessity to read down Sections 4 and 4-A of the Act. “Mere
possibility of an abuse cannot render a legislation invalid.” Supreme Court has
held, “The constitutionality of a legislation must be adjudged by the
generality of its provisions and not by its crudities, inequities or by the
possibilities of abuse of any of its provisions”.
Reading down Sections 4 and 4-A of
the Act the court held that non registration of such agreements, should confine
within the scope of the Act and not allowed to operate beyond it. Section 4(1)
which opens with the phrase ‘Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or
any other law for the time being in force’ is hereby read down to mean ‘For
the purposes of this Act’ and the same would control the rest of the
provisions in Section 4, the Bench held. [17]
Suggestions:
1. S.4 of the TNRRRLT Act 2017, mandates
on entering into a written agreement after the enactment of the act and any
existing agreement to be registered with the rent authority. But through the
analysis, it is found that there are scenarios where deadlock occur and there
is no clear procedure to formulate the agreement. Fixation of rent being mutual
through the agreement, the landlord may tend to fix the rent which might be
exorbitant. Hence clear procedure of fixing fair rent must be provided.
2. Clear awareness of the Act must be
provided to the general public as Tamil Nadu being in high demand on rental
properties. It is found that most of the disputes are either due to
non-registration of agreement or repossession of premises. It is agreeable that
ignorentia juris non excusat, but there are enactments of so many laws,
often the attention to such legislation gets faded.
Conclusion:
Considering the enactment of the new
tenancy act i.e., the TNRRRLT Act, 2017, it is found that the entire act right
from the fixation of rent to adjudication of disputes is based on the tenancy
agreement. The landlord and tenant now have a clear legal recourse. As the
tenancy agreement is an enforceable document, the order of eviction can be
sought only if the grounds for eviction are met. Thus, this makes the process
fair and just and restricts the arbitrary actions of the landlord. Only proper
and clear terms and conditions will be helpful in adjudicating matters to
either of the parties. Entering into such an agreement is mandatory for
resolving if any dispute arises. As having a separate hierarchy of courts and
the tenancy agreement being the sole document of proof, the dispute can be rightfully
met. While the courts constituted for resolving disputes under this act, has
come across deadlocks that might arise. Through the research it is found that
the courts are constantly interpreting the provisions of this legislation and
trying to amicably resolve the disputes by emphasising the registration of
tenancy agreement and ordering the rent authority to register such agreements
without causing inconvenience to the parties. Reading down of S.4 and S.4-A
helps in making the act more specific. Thereafter enacting such legislation in
line with the Model Tenancy Act 2017 by the Government of India, has improved
the legal protections for the tenants and empowered the legal rights of the
landlords. Thus, Tamil Nadu becoming one of the urbanised states in India,
adopting such legislation will significantly contribute in resolving major
disputes and balance the rights and responsibilities between the tenants and
landlords.
References:
Legislations:
1. Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and
Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017.
2.
Tamil Nadu Regulation
of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, (Amendment)Act,
2018.
3. Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and
Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Rules, 2019.
4. Constitution of India
Case Laws:
1. S.R.
Venkatesh v R. Jayakumar, C.R.P.No.3031 of 2022, C.M.P.No.13631 of 2022,
Neutral Citation
2. Ramesh
Shalunke V Pramila Jain, C.R.P. (N.P.D). No. 1996 of 2021, Neutral Citation
3. Muruganandam
vs J.Joseph, CRP NPD Nos.3056, 3061, 3062, 3063, 3067 and 3094 of 2021, Neutral
Citation
4. Dilip
Solanki vs Kiran Kumari, C.R.P.NPD.No.941 of 2023, Neutral Citation
5. Lalith
Kumar vs Pramila Jain, C.R.P.(N.P.D).No.1997 of 2021, Neutral Citation
6.
Mr.Vijayraj Bhandari vs Mr.Suresh Kumar J,
C.R.P.No.162 of 2023, Neutral Citation
Books:
1. Prof.
A. Chandrasekar, Land Law of Tamil Nadu (C.Sitharaman and Co. Pvt. Ltd.,; Third
edition (1 January 2020))
News
Articles:
1. Mohamed Imranullah S., Madras High
Court upholds constitutional validity of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017, April
26, 2024, The Hindu.
2. C Shivakumar, Coming soon, 11-month
rent agreement in Tamil Nadu, 26 May 2017, The New Indian Express.
3. Mohamed Imranullah S., Madras HC
directs Collectors to ensure registration of tenancy agreements within 30 days
of submission, December 23, 2022, The Hindu.
Government Websites:
[1] S.R. Venkatesh v R. Jayakumar,
C.R.P.No.3031 of 2022, C.M.P.No.13631 of 2022, Neutral Citation https://hcmadras.tn.gov.in
[2] S.4, TNRRRLT (Amendment) Act, 2018
https://tenancy.tn.gov.in/Content/Documents/TNRRRAmendmentAct2018.pdf
[3] S.8, TNRRRLT (Amendment) Act, 2018
https://www.tenancy.tn.gov.in/Content/Documents/TNRRRAmendmentAct2018.pdf
[4] S.4, Tamil Nadu (Lease and
Control) Act, 1960, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/89640929/
[5] S.9, TNRRRLT Act, 2017,
https://tenancy.tn.gov.in/Content/Documents/TNRRRLTact2017.pdf
[6] C Shivakumar, Coming soon, 11-month
rent agreement in Tamil Nadu, 26 May 2017, The New Indian Express
[7] S.R. Venkatesh v R. Jayakumar,
C.R.P.No.3031 of 2022, C.M.P.No.13631 of 2022, neutral citation, https://hcmadras.tn.gov.in
[8] Ramesh Shalunke V Pramila Jain,
C.R.P. (N.P.D). No. 1996 of 2021, Neutral Citation,
[9] Muruganandam vs J.Joseph, CRP NPD
Nos.3056, 3061, 3062, 3063, 3067 and 3094 of 2021, Neutral Citation
[10] V.Manimegalai vs Selvaraj Kannan,
C.R.P.(NPD).No.3317 of 2019, Neutral Citation
[11] Dilip Solanki vs Kiran Kumari, C.R.P.NPD.No.941
of 2023, Neutral Citation
[12] Ramesh Shalunke V Pramila Jain,
C.R.P. (N.P.D). No. 1996 of 2021, Neutral Citation,
[15] Mohamed Imranullah S, “Madras HC
directs Collectors to ensure registration of tenancy agreements within 30 days
of submission”, December 23, 2022, The Hindu.
[16]Lalith Kumar vs Pramila Jain, C.R.P.(N.P.D).No.1997
of 2021, Neutral Citation
[17] Mohamed Imranullah S, Madras High
Court upholds constitutional validity of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017, April
26, 2024, The Hindu