The legislative framework of rental laws must adapt to socio-economic changes while maintaining fundamental tenant rights to mitigate unbalanced power dynamics between landlords and tenants.

ORDER :

(Hon'ble Mr. Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.)

(Prayer in W.P.No.3985 of 2020 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to amend or to include the indispensible guidelines of Building Plan Approval and in the TNRRRLT Act.)

The Petitions:

The petitioners in all these Writ Petitions are either tenants or landlords in respect of the buildings let out for residential or commercial purposes. They are challenging the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (Tamil Nadu Act 42 of 2017) as amended. Various provisions of the Act are challenged on the grounds of repugnancy with central enactments, being arbitrary or taking away the vested rights of the parties. The parties herein are facing proceedings under the Act before the Rent Authority/Rent Court etc.. Thus, while keeping the merits of the matter and the interpretation of all or any of the provisions with reference to their facts situation open to be contested in their respective matters, they are challenging the vires of the Act before us. As such all these petitions are taken up, heard together, and disposed of by way of this common order.

Prelude:

2. In the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, especially in the urban areas, the landlords started exploiting the demand for accommodation, which necessitated the State to step in. To exercise control and ameliorate the situation, the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1949 was enacted. Thereafter, to further regulate the letting, control the rents payable and prevent unreasonable eviction of tenants, the State of Tamil Nadu enacted the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1960 (Act 18 of 1960) Irani Vs. State of Madras , (1962) 1 MLJ SC 92 .

2.1. It is held by this Court in Messrs.Raval & Company Vs. K.G.Rama-chandran (minor) and Ors. , (1974) 1 SCC 424 that the said Act was brought into force in respect of urban buildings, considering the rents, the conditions of scarce accommodation, and perhaps considerable hardship to tenants occasioned by evictions strictly under the law.The legislature seems to have intended to regulate these matters by way of a statute. It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Kewal Singh Vs. Lajwanti , (1980) 1 SCC 290 that this type of legislation was termed as a social reform to protect the tenants from capricious and frivolous eviction and thus conferring the status of statutory tenant who could not be evicted, except under the conditions specified therein and by following the procedures, prescribed by the Rent Control Act.

2.2. The said Act 18 of 1960 governed the field for close to 60 years.There were similar legislations throughout the country. It was felt that the provisions were made long back when the supply of rental accommodation was limited, real estate business had not evolved and properties were vested in the hands of very few people. With the changing scenario, robust real estate and availability of enough housing stock and with the policy of the Government of India making “Housing for All” as its mission, the Government of India circulated a Model Tenancy Act, to be adopted by the States in the year 2015. It was also made a mandatory condition to be fulfilled by the State to implement the “Housing for All” project of the Central Government. In this scenario, the State of Ta