SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL DEEMED UNIVERSITY

Internal Assessment –I

Submitted By

Gaurav Nair(23010324031)

Hrigved Choudhari(23010324038)

Division: C Class: BBA LLB

Subject – Legal Skills - II (Advocacy Skills)

Under the Guidance of

MS. Shruti Singh

Legal Skills Professor

1|Page
Introduction:-

“A right delayed is a right denied.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.

In the field of landlord-tenant law in India, the case of Priya presents a compelling scenario
highlighting the balance between property rights and contractual obligations. Priya, a tenant in a
rented residence, finds herself entangled in a dispute with her proprietor midway through the
agreed-upon lease term. The landlord's unilateral decision to prematurely terminate the lease and
evict Priya, without justifiable cause or adherence to contractual terms, raises significant legal
concerns. Priya's pursuit of legal counsel emphasises her assertion that her fundamental rights,
particularly those mentioned in Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution, have been violated.
At the core of this matter rests the interpretation and application of lease agreements within the
framework of constitutional protections, addressing both the rights and responsibilities of
landlords and tenants. This introduction sets the stage for an exhaustive exploration of the legal
complexities faced by and involved in Priya's predicament.

Counsellor: - Good morning, Priya. Thank you for coming in today to discuss your situation. I
understand that there are some disagreements between you and your landlord regarding the
termination of your lease agreement. Let's delve into the specifics, if you don't mind.

Priya: - Yes, indeed. Thank you for having me. My landlord is seeking to prematurely terminate
the two-year lease for my apartment without providing a valid justification, despite the fact that I
have duly signed the agreement. I perceive this treatment as unjust, and I am unwilling to accept
it.

Counsellor: - I sympathize with your predicament, Priya. Such circumstances can be distressing.
Let us examine the details further and with such, we can approach to a method to resolve this
issue faced.

2|Page
Issues Faced: -

1. Is the landlord's premature termination of Priya's lease agreement without valid reasons a
violation of Priya's property rights under Indian law?

2. Does the landlord's action of evicting Priya from the premises without adhering to the
terms of the lease agreement comprise a breach of contract under Indian law?

3. Has the landlord's decision to terminate Priya's lease agreement without valid reasons
infringed upon Priya's right to due process guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian
Constitution?

4. Can Priya claim damages or pursue legal recourse for the landlord's unilateral termination
of the lease agreement midway through its fixed term under Indian legal provisions?

Counsellor: Priya, I recognise your concerns. The landlord cannot terminate the lease without
valid reasons or without following the terms of the agreement. This could be a violation of your
property rights and right to due process guaranteed under the Indian Constitution."

Priya: I feel so powerless in this circumstance. What can I do to protect my rights and prevent
unjust eviction?"

Counsellor: We can challenge the premature termination of the lease legally. We will assess the
lease agreement and determine the grounds for termination provided by the landlord. If there are
no valid reasons or if appropriate notice has not been given, we can take the necessary measures
to protect your rights. It's essential to act directly to resolve this issue and ensure that you are not
unjustly targeted.

3|Page
Priya: This could work but before that I would like to find if any alternatives or any reasonable
solution can be adhered to avoid the hassle and find resolution for my matter.

Rule:-

The Constitution of India:

Article 19: Article 19 of the Indian Constitution provides various basic rights, including the right
to freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, travel, domicile, and profession. It
ensures that citizens have the liberty to express themselves, assemble peacefully, form
associations, and move freely throughout the territory of India, subject to certain reasonable
restrictions imposed in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the state,
friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, contempt of court,
defamation, or incitement to an offense.

Article 21: Article 21 of the Indian Constitution assures the right to life and personal liberty. It
states that no individual will be deprived of their life or personal liberty unless according to the
method prescribed by law. Thid contains several rights such as the right to dignity, privacy, and
fair process, safeguarding people against arbitrary acts of the state and ensuring their basic
freedoms are protected and safeguarded.

Article 300 A: Article 300 A of the Indian Constitution states and provides the right to property
as a basic right, but with significant limits. It asserts that no individual shall be deprived of their
property unless by permission of law.

The Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Section 108: Section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, states and provides the rights and
duties of lessors (landlords) and lessees (tenants). It covers the lessor's right to receive rent, the
lessee's responsibility to pay rent on time, and both parties duties for the use and upkeep of the

4|Page
leased property. This section also specifies scenarios under which the lessor may cancel the
lease.

Section 111: Section 111 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, outlines the processes by which
a lease may be decided. It provides that a lease may terminate by exhaustion of time, notice,
forfeiture, surrender, or difficulty of performance. The section provides the necessary notice
periods for various kinds of leases and the consequences of termination. It acts as a complete
framework for the end of leasing agreements in India.

The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Section 9: This section notably defines the authority of civil courts to rule upon all civil matters
unless their cognizance is explicitly or impliedly prohibited. Disputes occurring between
landlords and tenants over matters such as eviction, violation of lease agreements, or recovery of
rent normally come under the scope of civil courts and may be handled under this section.

The Specific Relief Act, 1963

Section 12: It deals with the specific performance of contracts. It states that if a contract,
including a leasing agreement, is capable of being enforced, the court may, at the plaintiff's
request, compel the defendant to fulfil the contract according to its terms. However, particular
performance is not provided in circumstances where monetary compensation is regarded enough
remedy or if the contract requires personal competence or is of a fiduciary character.

Section 14: Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, deals with contracts that are
determinable in nature, such as lease contracts. It states that a party to a determinable contract
may enforce it against the other party, subject to the limits of the Act. This section provides for

5|Page
the execution of leasing agreements even if they are susceptible to termination or determination
under specified situations, guaranteeing legal redress for parties engaged in such arrangements.

Analysis:

Violation of Property Right:

The case offers a clear view about the infringement of Priya's property rights as a tenant.
Property rights are not limited to ownership but also covers the rights of possession, use, and
enjoyment of property. Priya, as a tenant, owns some property rights over the lease as mentioned
in the agreement. However, the landlord's sudden decision to terminate the lease early and evict
Priya without proper grounds violates against these rights.

In India, property rights are constitutionally guaranteed by Article 300A, which ensures the right
to property as a basic right. Although this right has been changed to exclude land and its
resources, it nevertheless applies to other types of property, including leased buildings.

In the case of Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation1, the petitioners who were
represented by Olga Tellis, were a group of pavement dwellers, who were facing eviction from
the BMC as they were responsible for urban planning and governance, stating reasons that like
maintaining public order and cleanliness. The pavement dwellers had actually resided on the
pavement for a few years, and their livelihood depended on it, as many of them were daily wage
workers. In the final landmark judgement, the Supreme Court recognized the right to livelihood
as an essential part of right to life under article 21 of the Indian Constitution. It held that the
drive from the Bombay Municipal Court was violative of the fundamental rights of the pavement
dwellers.

Additionally, Priya's situation shows the power disparity in the following landlord-tenant
interactions. Landlords generally holds the power over rental houses, leaving tenants open to
unlawful and arbitrary eviction. Priya's declaration of her property rights acts as a critical defense
against such abuse, underscoring the need of legal safeguards for renters' rights in India.

1
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1986 AIR 180, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 51

6|Page
In conclusion, the case shows an obvious violation of Priya's property rights as a renter. The
landlord's effort to prematurely terminate the lease and evict Priya without sufficient grounds or
respect to legal processes is a violation of her rights under both the Indian Constitution and
applicable tenancy regulations. This underscores the necessity for solid legal measures to protect
tenants from arbitrary eviction and secure the enforcement of their property rights in India's
rental market.

Breach of Contract:

The case, as stated, shows a clear case of breach of contract on the side of the landlord. When
Priya signed into a lease agreement with the landlord for a defined duration of two years, both
parties were bound by the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement. Midway through the
lease time, the landlord's unilateral choice to terminate the lease early constitutes to a violation of
the contract.

In lease agreements, there are often terms that describe the conditions under which the lease may
be revoked before the agreed-upon period ends. These clauses frequently require legitimate
grounds for termination, such as non-payment of rent, violation of lease terms by the tenant, or
specified circumstances agreed upon by both parties. However, in this situation it suggests that
the landlord is terminating the lease without presenting sufficient grounds or adhering to the
provisions of the agreement. This behaviour immediately breaches the contractual
responsibilities set out in the leasing agreement.

As a result of the landlord's violation of contract, Priya may be entitled to recieve relief
of different legal remedies. These remedies might include claiming damages for any financial
losses experienced due to the early termination of the lease, such as relocation fees or increased
rental charges for finding new lodging. Priya can also seek particular performance damages,
whereby the court requires the landlord to fulfill their responsibilities under the lease agreement
by allowing Priya to stay in the premises for the duration of the period which is agreed upon.

In essence, the landlord's premature termination of the lease agreement without sufficient
grounds or any particular valid reason to the conditions is a clear breach of contract. Priya has

7|Page
numerous legal alternatives open to seek remedy for the infringement and preserve her rights as a
tenant under the law.

Solutions:

Counsellor: There might be a different resolution for this. It's appropriate to feel concerned but
it's worth trying to open a discourse. Sometimes, conflicts like these may be handled through the
process of mediation, when a neutral third party assists encourage conversation and bargaining
between both sides.

Priya: Mediation seems like it may be useful. How does it function exactly?

Counsellor: In mediation, both you and your landlord would meet with a skilled mediator who
would listen to all sides of the problem and assist lead a discussion aimed at reaching a mutually
acceptable solution. The mediator doesn't make decisions but aids in leading the debate towards
a settlement that satisfies both sides.

Priya: That seems like a reasonable approach. How do we go about commencing mediation?

Counsellor: I may help you with it. We'll reach out to your landlord and recommend mediation
as a means for resolving the problem without turning to legal action immediately. If your
landlord agrees, we'll next plan a mediation session where both of you may voice your issues and
work towards finding a resolution together.

Priya: That seems like an excellent strategy. I appreciate your help on this situation. Let's go with
mediation and see if we can fix this matter without escalating it further.

Counsellor: Absolutely, Priya. I'll start the process of contacting out to your landlord and
organising a mediation appointment. In the meanwhile, if you have any other questions or
concerns, feel free to reach out to me. We'll work together to get the greatest potential conclusion
for you.

8|Page
Conclusion:

In the case of Priya, the legal concerns centering around her tenancy dispute with the landlord
emphasise the difficulty in balancing between property rights, contractual responsibilities, and
constitutional safeguards. Priya's assertion of her basic rights, notably those guaranteed in
Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution, underlines the necessity for strong legal
protections to prohibit arbitrary acts by landlords and provide due process for tenants.

The infringement of Priya's property rights and the breaking of the lease agreement by the
landlord demonstrate the essential need for appropriate legal channels to handle such conflicts.
The Indian Constitution, in Articles 19 and 21, ensures people' rights to property and due
process, which are vital in safeguarding individuals from arbitrary acts by governmental and
private enterprises equally. Additionally, legislative provisions such as Section 108 and Section
111 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872
provide the basis for defining the rights and obligations of lessors and lessees, allowing remedy
for breaches of contract.

Finally, Priya's case underscores the significance of protecting tenants' rights and providing
effective legal remedies in the face of landlord misbehaviour. The Indian legal system can seek
for a fair and equitable resolution to tenancy issues by combining constitutional safeguards,
legislative provisions, and alternative dispute resolution procedures, while preserving the values
of justice and fairness for all parties.

9|Page