The legal relationship between
the landlord and the tenant is governed by the contract of tenancy between
them. The rent control acts have been enacted with the objectives to (i)
protect the tenant from eviction from the rented property where he is living,
except for defined reasons and on defined conditions; and (ii) protect the
tenant from having to pay more than a fair rent.
Once the tenancy comes to an
end on expiry or early termination of the agreement, the tenant is bound to put
the landlord in possession of the property and the landlord acquires the right
to possession. However, if the tenant continues to stay on even after the
expiry or early termination of the agreement, the landlord, even with the best
of title, has no right to resume possession extra-judicially by use of force.
Therefore, under law, the possession of the property by unlawful and forceful
means is prohibited and the tenant cannot be dispossessed otherwise than by due
course of law.
The landlord is entitled to
initiate legal proceedings against the tenant with the competent court seeking
ejectment of the tenant from the property on the grounds of (i) breach of terms
and condition of tenancy, (ii) subletting of the property by the tenant, (iii)
material deterioration of the condition of the building, (iv) requirement of
building by the landlord for own occupation, and (v) default in payment of rent
by the tenant for the specified period etc.
The supreme court has in Ram
Prakash Sharma versus Bulbul Birla (2011) 6SCC 449 passed the general direction
that once the petition for eviction of tenant has been allowed by the court,
the tenant is bound to vacate the property within the stipulated time or
extended time. However, if the tenant commits breach of the eviction order and
continues to remain in possession of the property, police force can be used to
obtain eviction of the tenant from the property.
