A PROJECT REPORT ON – “DURATION AND TERMINATION OF LEASE”

MANIPAL UNIVERSITY JAIPUR

UNDER SUPERVISION OF:- SUBMITTED BY:-

Dr. MARIYAM BEG MUKUL BAJAJ
ASSOCIATEPROFESSOR 151301052
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. Mukul Bajaj student of B.A.LL.B (Hons.), Seventh Semester, School of
Law, Manipal University Jaipur has completed the project work entitled “Duration and
Termination of Lease”, under my supervision and guidance.
It is further certify that the candidate has made sincere efforts for the completion of the project
work.

SUPERVISOR NAME

(Dr. Mariyam Beg)

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I express deep sense of gratitude and indebtness to our teacher Dr. Mariyam Beg under whose
guidance valuable suggestions, constant encouragement and kind supervision the present project
was carried out. I am also grateful to college and faculty of law for their feedback and for keeping
us on schedule.
I also wish my sincere thanks to my friends who helped directly or indirectly by giving their
valuable suggestions.

Mukul Bajaj
Contents
Mukul Bajaj .................................................................................................................................... 3
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 5
DURATION OF LEASE ................................................................................................................ 6
LIMITATIONS OF THE SECTION .............................................................................................. 7
Determination of lease .................................................................................................................. 10
Efflux Of Time.............................................................................................................................. 11
Contingent Term ........................................................................................................................... 11
Merger ........................................................................................................................................... 11
Express Surrender ......................................................................................................................... 12
Implied Surrender ......................................................................................................................... 12
By Forfeiture ................................................................................................................................. 12
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 13
BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 14
INTRODUCTION

This duration and termination of lease under Section 106 and Section 111 of Transfer of Property
Act, 1882. the scope of section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 it’s of the widest
amplitude the section establishes a rule for duration of leases which are not governed by a contract
or a local law or usage, i.e. where the period of lease is not specified and thus then thereafter
various amendments were proposed some passed some not. Section 106 of the Transfer of Property
Act, 1882 lays down a general rule that a lease of immovable property for agricultural or
manufacturing purpose shall terminate on six months’ notice by either the lessor or lesser, while
fifteen days is the time period in the case of a lease of immovable property for a purpose other than
agricultural one. Every notice under this section has to be in writing, signed by or on behalf of the
person giving it; either sent by post or is delivered personally. This section has been amended and
altered several times. By the amendment act of 1929, “either be sent by post to the party who is
intended to be bound by it or be tendered or delivered personally to such party” has been
substituted with “tendered or delivered personally to the party who is intended to be bound by it.”
By local acts, the following two changes have been brought in the section. Firstly, ‘expiring with
the end of a year of the tenancy’ and ‘expiring with the end of a month of the tenancy’ have been
omitted. Secondly, the words ‘fifteen days’ and ‘notice’ have been substituted by the words ‘thirty
days’ and ‘notice’. The purpose of the provision in sec. 106 is to terminate the relationship of lessor
and lessee before the lessor sues for possession. He has no right of entry till the tenancy is
disrupted. Further, the idea is that every lessee must have some reasonable notice before he is
asked to vacate the premises.
DURATION OF LEASE

Duration of certain leases in absence of written contract or local usage.

In the absence of a contract or local law or usage to the contrary, a lease of immovable property
for agricultural or manufacturing purposes shall be deemed to be a lease from year to year,
terminable, on the part of either lessor or lessee, by six months' notice; and a lease of immovable
property for any other purpose shall be deemed to be a lease from month to month, terminable, on
the part of either lessor or lessee, by fifteen days' notice. Notwithstanding anything contained in
any other law for the time being in force, the period mentioned in sub-section (1) shall commence
from the date of receipt of notice.
A notice under sub-section (1) shall not be deemed to be invalid merely because the period
mentioned therein falls short of the period specified under that sub-section, where a suit or
proceeding is filed after the expiry of the period mentioned in that sub-section. Every notice under
sub-section (1) must be in writing, signed by or on behalf of the person giving it, and either be sent
by post to the party who is intended to be bound by it or be tendered or delivered personally to
such party, or to one of his family or servants at his residence, or (if such tender or delivery is not
practicable) affixed to a conspicuous part of the property.

This section has been amended and altered several times. By the amendment act of 1929, “either
be sent by post to the party who is intended to be bound by it or be tendered or delivered personally
to such party” has been substituted with “tendered or delivered personally to the party who is
intended to be bound by it.” By local acts, the following two changes have been brought in the
section. Firstly, ‘expiring with the end of a year of the tenancy’ and ‘expiring with the end of a
month of the tenancy’ have been omitted. Secondly, the words ‘fifteen days’ and ‘notice’ have
been substituted by the words ‘thirty days’ and ‘notice’. The purpose of the provision in sec. 106
is to terminate the relationship of lessor and lessee before the lessor sues for possession. He has
no right of entry till the tenancy is disrupted. Further, the idea is that every lessee must have some
reasonable notice before he is asked to vacate the premises.
There are various controversies related to section 106 and all of this started with the wrong
interpretation of the case of Mangilal vs. SuganChand1. Years after the notice and the filing of
the suit, the court would be compelled to declare the notice invalid, though the defendant had more
than the prescribed time of six months or fifteen days by the date of filing of the suit or by the date
of judgment dismissing the suit.

Also In the case where the lessess plea was accepted regarding commencement of tenancy this
technicality has been leading to too much of an injustice to the plaintiff though no prejudice at all
is caused to the defendant. This was all because of the case of Mangilal vs. SuganChand.
In Dattonpant vs. Vithalrao similar principle was applied which clearly led injustice to the
lessor.

The 108th report on ‘Amendment to sec.106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882’ of Law
Commission of India, suggested that some provisions of the section needs to be amended. The
committee proposed that the provision of expiry should be removed and the duration of 15 days
must be substituted by 60 days. This proposal has not been approved yet by the union of India.

LIMITATIONS OF THE SECTION

The scope of this section is limited to certain conditions. They are:

CONTRACT TO THE CONTRARY – There is not a necessity is this section that the contract to
the contrary should be expressed only, rather it can be implied also the only condition being that
the contract needs to be valid. All the stipulated provisions under section 106 of the act will remain
active until there is a contract to the contrary as to the time of the duration of the lease in the lease
agreement. Now the major limitation of this section is that if there is a contract to the contrary with
different provisions regarding duration of lease then the statutory requirement of notice is of no
use. In the landmark case of Moosa Ruty v Thekka, the court held that it is not necessary to send
a notice to the lessee about the land; a demand will be sufficient if the lease carries a condition that
the concerned land will be surrendered whenever required. In the case of V. Sidharthan v
PattiortiRamadasan, the court held that the lessee is bound to surrender the premise on demand

1
AIR 1950 EP 175
of the lessor. This would show a “contract to the contrary”. Also in the very case of Amar Singh
v. Hoshir Singh2, the court explicitly held that the lessor has the right to evict the lessee without
even presenting a prior notice if the lessee fails to pay the agreed rent.

LOCAL LAW TO THE CONTRARY – The presumption considered in this section as to certain
leases being deemed to be from year to year or from month to month, can be raised only in cases,
where there is no local law to the contrary. It can’t be made if there is a law unexpectedly. Such
law must be in force at the time of the judgment. Thus the local law would prevail if the law of the
land has stopped to be in force. Likewise in Uttar Pradesh understanding that the system for
interpretation of section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was prompting foul play convincing
the lessor to record the crisp suits after quite a long while have slipped by. The legislature of UP
had, by Act 24 of 1954, precluded the words “terminating with the end of a month of the tenure”.
It had likewise expanded the time of notice of 15 days on account of month to month tenures to 30
days. After the said UP amendment, the first part of sec. 106 reads as follows:

USAGE TO THE CONTRARY – many times the provisions stated in section 106 have been
doubted and were only considered applicable if there is no usage to the contrary. Utbandi, a custom
in Bengal, is a tenancy at will, which can be terminated by a verbal demand for possession. If we
talk about usage, then there is a sharp contrast between the usage in Bombay and Punjab. In
Bombay it is mandatory to serve a notice to quit at least a month before whereas in Punjab, the
notice period is 15 days. In the case of Surendranath Satkar v. Poornachandra Mukherji, the
court held that Utbandi, a custom in Bengal, is a tenancy at will, which can be terminated by a
verbal demand for possession. If we talk about usage, then there is a sharp contrast between the
usage in Bombay and Punjab. In Bombay it is mandatory to serve a notice to quit at least a month
before whereas in Punjab, the notice period is 15 days.

LEASE FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE – all the other kinds of the lease which don’t come in
the ambit of agriculture and manufacturing purpose shall be from month to month terminable by a
15-day prior notice which expires at the end of the month of tenancy. Technically, a lease for
several purposes like setting up a printing press or library etc. which does not fall under the ambit

2
AIR 1952 All 141.
of “manufacturing purpose” as interpreted by section 106 of the act will be known as a lease for
‘any other purpose’.

NOTICE TO QUIT

As per section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a notice to quit has to be sent by the
lessor to the lessee in order to terminate the lease agreement. The lease agreement can be
terminated by issuing a notice of 15 days in cases of monthly tenancy which deals with ‘any other
purpose’. If the lease is for agricultural or manufacturing purpose, the notice to quit can be served
by giving a prior notice of six months as it is on yearly basis.

There is a list of conditions which need to be fulfilled and procedure in which a notice is to be
served. The following conditions are:

 The notice must be candid and unequivocal. The notice terminating the tenancy must be
with respect of the property leased, and not in respect of the proportion of the lease and if
made it would be considered invalid.
 It should be signed by or on behalf of the person giving it. Similarly, if the notice of the
lessor is signed by his attorney or by his sons after his death is considered to be valid.
 The notice must indicate with certainty the intention on the part of the person giving it to
terminate the existing tenancy.
 Notice to quit may be served personally or by post. Although the publication of a notice in
a local new-paper or publishing the notice in any other public domain, like telegraph, etc,
is not a valid notice. In the same way in case of a corporation, the notice must be sent to an
authorized officer. A registered notice would always be presumed to be service of the
notice.
 Affixing the notice to the property is the last resort. The only thing which has to be taken
care of is that the notice should be regarding the whole demised property not in proportion
otherwise the notice would be ineffective3.

3
Page 174, Sir, Gour, H.S. Dr. Sir Hari Singh Gour’s Commentary on The Transfer Of Property Act
DATE OF EXPIRY OF NOTICE

The concerned section clearly states that if the lease is from year to year, a notice will expire with
the end of the year of the tenancy. And, if the lease is from month to month, a notice will expire
with the end of the month of the tenancy.

The only thing which has to be taken care of is that the time should not be less than the prescribed
time in the statutory provision although the time can be exceeded. The notice should expire at the
end of the year or the month otherwise it would be invalid as decide in the very case of Maya
Chanda & others v. Krishnan Lal Dey & Anr.

Determination of lease
A lease of immovable property determines-
(a) by efflux of the time limited thereby,
(b) where such time is limited conditionally on the happening of some event-by the happening of
such event.
(c) where the interest of the lessor in the property terminates on, or his power to dispose of the
same extends only to, the happening of any event-by the happening of such event.
(d) in case the interests of the lessee and the lessor in the whole of the property become vested at
the same time in one person in the same right.
(e) by express surrender, that is to say, in case the lessee yields up his interest under the lease to
the lessor, by mutual agreement between them.
(f) by implied surrender.
(g) by forfeiture; that is to say, (1) in case the lessee breaks an express condition which provides
that, on breach thereof, the lessor may re-enter; or (2) in case the lessee renounces his character as
such by setting up a title in a third person or by claiming title in himself; or (3) the lessee is
adjudicated an insolvent and the lease provides that the lessor may re-enter on the happening of
such event; and in any of these cases the lessor or his transferee gives notice in writing to the lessee
of his intention to determine the lease.
(h) on the expiration of a notice to determine the lease, or to quit, or of intention to quit, the
property leased, duly given by one party to the other.
Efflux Of Time
Leases for a definite period expire on the last day of the term, and the lessor or any other person
entitled to the reversion may enter without notice or other formality provided there is no 'holding
over' within the meaning of sec. 116. Accordingly, clause (a) has to be read with sec. 116. Where
before the determination of the lease by efflux of time the lessee applies to the custodian for
confirmation of the lease under sec. 5A. East Punjab Evacuees' Administration of Property) Act,
1947 and the custodian impliedly assents to his continuing in possession, the lessee does not
become a trespasser.

Contingent Term
If the term of the lease Is limited conditionally on the happening of some event, the lease is
determined by the happening of such event. Thus, where the term is limited for thirty years if the
lessee shall so long live, the lease is terminable at the end of thirty years or upon the death of the
lessee, which event may first happen.
If the maximum duration of the term is fixed (the term may be for any length of time but there
must be a definite limit), the lease may be subject to determination within the period; and this may
be provided either by a provision that the lease may be determined by notice on a given event, as
for example, upon the termination at a war [ Great Northern Rty Co. v Arnold], or by a provision
that the lease is to endure only during the continuation of a specified state of affairs, as for instance,
while the lessee remains in the lessor's employment, or continues to occupy the premises, so that
upon the state of affairs ceasing the lease automatically determines

Merger

The common law doctrine of merger is statutorily embodied in clause (d) ot sec. 111 of the T.P.
Act. The doctrine of merger as contemplated in clause (d) conlemplates (i) coalescence of the
interest of the lessee and the interest of Ihe lessor, (ii) in the whole of the property, (iii) at the same
time, (iv) in one person, and (v) in the same right. There must be a complete union of the whole
interests of the lessor and the lessee so as to enable the lesser interest of the lessee sinking into the
larger interest of the lessor in the reversion
Express Surrender
In either case it is an yielding up of the term of lessee's interest to him who has the immediate
reversion or the lessor's interest. It takes effect like a contract by mutual consent on the lessor's
acceptance of the act of the lessee. The lessee cannot, therefore, surrender unless the term is vested
in him; and the surrender must be to a person in whom the immediate reversion expectant on the
term is vested. There must be a taking of possession, not necessarily a physical taking, but
something amounting to a virtual taking of possession.

Implied Surrender
The principle which governs the doctrine of implied surrender of a lease is that when certain
relationship existed between two parties in respect of a subject-matter and a new relationship has
come into existence regarding the same subject-matter, the two sets cannot co-exist, being
inconsistent and incompatible between each other i.e. if the latter can come into effect only on
termination of the former, then it would be doomed to have been terminated in order to enable the
latter to operate. A mere alteration or improvement or even impairment of the former relationship
would not ipso facto amount to implied surrender. It has to be ascertained on the terms of the new
relationship vis-a-vis the erstwhile demise and then judging whether there was termination of the
old jural relationship by implication

By Forfeiture
By forfeiture; that is to say,
(1) in case the lessee breaks an express condition which provides that, on breach thereof, the lessor
may re- enter or
(2) in case the lessee renounces his character as such by setting up a title in a third person or by
claiming title in himself or
(3) the lessee is adjudicated an insolvent and the lease provides that the lessor may re- enter on the
happening of such event and in 3[ any of these cases] the lessor or his transferee
4[ gives notice in writing to the lessee of] his intention to determine the lease
CONCLUSION

Sec 111 of Transfer of Property Act 1882 i:e Determination of Lease is a very wide topic and
covers a large segment of day todays life issues. A lease or tenancy may come to an end in the
following ways. It should, however, be noted that the effect of this Section has been practically
superseded by various Rent Control and Eviction Acts passed by various State Legislature fr e.g.,
By Lapse of time; By happening of a specified event; By termination of lessor’s interest; By
merger; By surrender; By implied surrender; By forfeiture; On the expiration of the notice to quit.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Saxena. PonnamPradan. Property Law. Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur. 1st
Edition. Third Reprint. 2010. New Delhi
2. Sir, Gour, H.S. Dr. Sir Hari Singh Gour’s Commentary on The Transfer Of Property Act,
1882. Delhi Law House. 12th Edition. 2010. Delhi.
3. DF Mulla. The Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Lexis Wadhwa Nagpur. (ed. Dr. GC
Bharuka). 10th Edition 2006. Haryana
4. Chitaley& Manohar. Commentary on the Transfer of Property Act (Vol.1). All India
Reporter Pvt. Ltd. 7th Edition. 2010. Nagpur
5. Transfer of Property Act, 1882