SHORT NOTE
DELHI HIGH COURT
Jayant Nath, J.
Swarn Lata Agarwal & Anr. —Plaintiff
versus
Narang Medicine Co. —Defendant
CS(OS) 2731 of 2012 & IA No.10420 of 2013
Decided on 24.11.2015

IMPORTANT POINT
Merely denying title by landlord bona fide, on ground of seeking information of such title does not amount to repudiation or forfeiture of tenancy.

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 12, Rule 6 — Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111 (g) — Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 — Section 19 — Forfeiture of tenancy — Decree of possession and ejectment — Suit for — Defendant in reply before concerned authority — Despite being aware of registered sale deed in favour of plaintiff and despite paying rent to plaintiff for two years — Denied title of plaintiff and relationship of landlord and tenant — Title sought to be set up in third party — HELD — Forfeiture of tenancy by defendant.

       Held: In the facts of this case, it is clear that the defendant has acted mala fidely. The defendant in its reply before the concerned authority, despite being aware of a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and despite paying rent to the plaintiff for two years, denied the title of the plaintiff and the relationship of landlord and tenant. Title is sought to be set up in a third party. Accordingly, I hold that there is forfeiture of the tenancy by the defendant. Issue No.1 is decided accordingly.

       Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111 (g) — Determination of Lease — Where lessee renounces his character by setting up title in third person — Or claiming title in himself — Forfeiture of lease would take place.

       Held: Hence, where a lessee renounces his character by setting up a title in a third person or claiming title in himself forfeiture of the lease would take place.

       Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111 (g) — Repudiation of tenancy by tenant would follow — Where tenant unequivocally repudiated tenancy and set up title either in himself or in third person — Disclaimer has to be clear and in unequivocal terms — Merely denying title by landlord bona fide on ground of seeking information of such title does not amount to repudiation or forfeiture of tenancy.

       Held: Hence repudiation of tenancy by the tenant would follow only where the tenant has unequivocally repudiated the tenancy and set up a title either in himself or in a third person. The disclaimer has to be clear and in unequivocal terms. Merely denying title by a landlord bona fide on the ground of seeking information of such title does not amount to repudiation or forfeiture of the tenancy.

       Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 111 (g) — Determination of Lease — Denial of title by defendant mischievous — It was attempt to set up title in third party — In view of provisions of Section 111 (g) of TP Act — Clear Act forfeiture of lease.

       Held: In my opinion, denial of title by the defendant was mischievous. It was an attempt to set up title in a third party and in view of provisions of Section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act it is a clear Act forfeiture of the lease. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in Sheela vs. Firm Prahlad Rai Prem Prakash (supra) the act of denial of title which falls foul of section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act is a malicious Act detrimental to the interest of the landlord. The act was not bonafide or an attempt to bonafidely verify the title of the plaintiff by the defendant.

       Result: Suit disposed off