Advocates:
N.C.CHATTERJI, S.C.MAJUMDER, SARJU PRASAD, SUKUMAR GHOSH

The provided legal document discusses the principles surrounding the obligation to pay rent in relation to the landlord’s duty to provide possession of the demised premises. It emphasizes that the obligation to pay rent is not strictly dependent on the landlord providing full possession of the entire property. Instead, the court considers the circumstances of each case, including whether the tenant has enjoyed a substantial portion of the property without inconvenience or has been deprived of a significant part of the premises. The judgment indicates that if a landlord fails to deliver possession of a portion of the property, the tenant may be entitled to suspend rent or claim a proportionate part of the rent, depending on the specific facts.

This implies that there is an intrinsic link between the obligation to pay rent and the landlord’s duty to provide a functional and habitable premises, but the relationship is nuanced. The obligation to pay rent may be adjusted or apportioned when the landlord does not fulfill their duty to deliver possession of the entire premises, especially when the tenant’s use and enjoyment of the property are substantially affected or restricted.

Therefore, the document suggests that while the obligation to pay rent is connected to the landlord’s duty to provide possession, it can be modulated based on the extent of possession and the circumstances of each case, rather than being an absolute obligation regardless of the landlord’s performance.