The prerequisite in this context is that it is a rented place, the landlord or
owner is someone who has acquired this property either by inheritance or by
purchase or gift, the landlord is the natural or legal person to whom Rent is
A tenant is someone who pays the landlord the rent in return for the occupancy
of the property. The relationship between landlord and tenant is often perceived
as contentious and antagonistic in India but is basically demand-driven.
No, the relationship begins with sharpness and therefore it is important to make
the pacts that either party will make to make it pleasant, fruitful, and
economically rewarding, as a balance needs to be struck and the pendulum not too
far in direction one of the parties, as the same person who owns the property
can also be a tenant in another city or another area of the same city or
Rent Control sets a legal limit on the maximum rent, or in other words, limits
the rent as it deems appropriate according to the rules set by the state.
In the following case of M/S Popat & Kotecha Property v. Ashim Kumar Dey
, As per
the West Bengal premises Tenancy Act by Amendment Act No. 14 of 2001 with
effect from 10th July 2001 [which had incorporated sub-section (8) to Section
5], it was to be decided that whether the tenant can be evicted on the the basis
that there was a default in the payment of the Municipal Taxes as apportioned by
Facts And Issues Of The Case
- This appeal is against the order dated 7th December 2016 passed by the
Calcutta High Court in a proceeding under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy
- The relevant lease agreement between the parties were signed in 1991,
according to which the parties had agreed that the rent includes all local
taxes to be paid and if these taxes are increased, the rent is to be
- With the amendment of the law on July 10, 2001, and after the addition
of paragraph 8 of Article 5, the obligation to pay the municipal tax/taxes
fell specifically on the tenant in his capacity as a resident.
Section 5(8) says that:
Every tenant shall pay his share of municipal tax as an
occupier of the premises in accordance with the provisions of the Kolkata
Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 or the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993.
- In the present case, the property tax payable on the claimed property
was revalued and improved. Several tenants were occupied in the lawsuit.
- The landlord distributed the tax to the tenants and issued a decision on
this on February 7, 2003. The defendant applied for a decision on 29th March
2003 in the interest of a harmonious relationship between tenant and
- Since the defendant had not paid the the amount owed as his share of the
municipal tax, the landlord initiated the eviction proceedings for failure
to pay the rent by the defendant.
The court of the first instance dismissed the landlord's action because no
evidence of the property tax increase had been submitted and the defendant a
tenant had deposited the monthly rent with the rental manager so that the tenant
was not to be regarded as a defaulting party.
- On appeal, the High Court upheld the the decision of the learned court
of the first instance, albeit on a different basis.
- The High Court ruled that even if municipal taxes are included as part
of the rent payable, no rent increase will be made by unilateral notice from
the landlord under Article 20 of the 1997 Act and that such an improvement
will be made by the Comptroller of. rents must be arranged. Since the above
condition was not met, the high court rejected the landlord's appeal.
- In the present case, the rental agreement included the municipal taxes
in the monthly rent, and any improvement in the same would also lead to an
improvement in the monthly rent.
- According to Article 5 (8), as the tenant of the premises, the
obligation to pay municipal taxes fell on the tenant, so the relevant
clauses of the lease were replaced by the legal obligation imposed on the
tenant by the change in the law.
This appeal is against the order dated 7th December 2016 passed by the Calcutta
High Court in a proceeding under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 for
eviction of the tenant on the ground that the tenant had defaulted in payment of
his share of municipal tax as an occupier under the Kolkata Municipal
Corporation Act, 1980. In this case, it was evident that there was a default on
the part of the tenant. The application of the landlord for eviction of the
tenant was allowed in this case.
While taking the case of Calcutta Gujarati Education Society and another vs.
Calcutta Municipal Corpn. and others as a precedent said that:
The whole amount
of tax is recoverable from the lessor and may also be recovered from the tenant
or sub-tenant through the attachment of the rent. In the case where the lessor
or landlord has paid the whole tax including the a portion of tax payable by the
tenant or sub-tenant, the landlord has to be equipped with the power to get
himself reimbursed by recovery of the portion of the tax paid by him on behalf
of the tenant. Section 231 of the Act, therefore, creates a fiction that the tax
apportioned on the tenant would be treated as rent
and would be
recoverable as such.
The word rent
has not been defined in the tenancy law and
this Court has taken note of this the legal position in the case of Puspa Sen
Gupta v. Susma Ghose
(1990) 2 SCC 651 which arose out of the provisions of the
Tenancy Act applicable to West Bengal. Rent is a compendious expression which
may include lease money with service charges for water, electricity and other
taxes leviable on the tenanted premises.
Although the provisions of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act of 1980 are
definite, in contrast to the landlord, the tenant has the primary liability.
Also to challenge this through appeals, etc., the 1980 Act does not provide for
the valuation of part of the property occupied by tenants or various parts of
the property occupied by different tenants, but the Act stipulates that the
taxpayer is paid according to section 230 of Act of 1980.
responsible person is the owner who has the right to collect part of the tax
paid by him on behalf of the tenant. If necessary, the cost of the occupied area
corresponds to the value of the total area of the property. According to the
1980 law, if the landlord does not pay taxes, the rent paid by the tenant is
liable to be attached.
In In this case, the defendant tenant's violation of regulations is obvious
because the tenant's municipal tax liability exceeds the obligation to pay rent
under Article 5 (8) of the law. According to the 1997 Act, the High Court cannot
require the landlord to obtain a formal rent increase order from the rent
High Court Judgment:
Tarun Kumar J. set aside the order that was given by the trial court and asked
to dismiss the application u/s 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act of
1997 on the basis that there was less evidence present at the time of the
application and asked both the parties to start fresh with the fresh
application. It was also said that by providing one notice to the tenant stating
the payment of the taxes by the tenant cannot be done by the landlord under
section 22 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act of 1997.
While after the amendment of the act and incorporation of clause 8 to section 5
then the duty to pay all the taxes fell on the tenant, it was an obligation of
the court to consider the amendment in the act which was applicable from 10th
July 2001 and the case was filed in the year 2003 by the landlord as well as
maybe the evidence was not provided clearly but it was clear from the facts of
the the case that the duty to pay extra taxes which were increased with the time
was to be paid by the tenant, this was clearly stated in the agreement signed by
the tenant and the landlord as well as when the tenant denied any agreement
between the landlord and tenant the court must have understood the intentions of
the tenant to not pay the rent. While the landlord paid the taxes which were to
be paid by the tenant was the duty of the court to ask the tenant to pay the
rent which was paid by the landlord along with the eviction of the landlord's
Supreme Court Judgment:
While the supreme court held that the duty to pay the increased taxes were on
the tenant and in no way that is to be paid by the landlord as the
landlord-tenant the agreement stated the increased taxes to be paid by the
tenant himself and if the tenant fails to do so so then he/she can be evicted
from the premises by the landlord.
Even in the following case before sending the
notice of eviction to the tenant, the landlord asked the tenant for the payment
of the taxes which were not paid by the tenant later on. Also after the
amendment of 2001 and incorporation of clause 8 to section 5 of the Kolkata
Municipal Corporation Act 1980 which stated the obligations of the tenants to
pay any share of increased municipal tax as an occupier of the premises. The
rent agreement between the parties was executed in the year 1991.
Default on the part of the tenant was clear which was correctly decided by the
I believe that the court took a correct stand in the following case and even
proper reasoning was provided by them unlike what was earlier given by the High
Court. Considering all the facts and issues of the case along with the statutory
amendments which took place in the course of the case were duly understood and
put together precisely, correct cases were stated as the precedent in the case
due to which the judgment was precise and understandable.
- Fundamentals of Rent Control Legislation in India along with Rent Acts
of All States, 1984, by R C Kochatta.
- Tenants can be evicted for not Paying Municipal Taxes under West Bengal
Tenancy Act https://taxguru.in/corporate-law/tenants-evicted-paying-municipal-taxes-west-bengal-tenancy-act.html
- M/s Popat & Kotecha property & ORS. Vs Ashim Kumar Dey (Supreme Court of
India) Civil Appeal No. 8149 of 2018
- Advocate Cheney ceil, Cheney ceil lawyer, Evict Tenants from your
Property, Evict Tenants in Kolkata, Evict Tenants in west Bengal, help
eviction of tenant Kolkata, help eviction of tenant West Bengal, legal help
evict tenant Kolkata, legal help evict tenant West Bengal, Property in West
Bengal, tenant eviction West Bengal, Tenants eviction in Kolkata, Tenants in
- M/s Popat & Kotecha property & ORS. Vs Ashim Kumar Dey (Supreme Court of
India) Appeal Number: Civil Appeal No. 8149 of 2018