Upon eviction of a tenant, right of members of his family, is also extinguished in rented premises

In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court, held that though termination of tenancy is required to be done by issuing a notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act 1882, yet the filing of a suit has been treated as a notice terminating tenancy.

The said ruling was delivered in the matter of Ramesh Chander Sethi & Anr. vs. Shashi Grover, RFA No. 945 of 2018 decided on 07.12.2018.


The Respondent/Plaintiff/Landlord had let-out the subject property to Appellant No. 1/Defendant No. 1/Tenant for a period of two years vide a registered Rent Agreement dated 14.11.2011. The Tenant failed to vacate the premises despite three letters dated 20.09.2013, 12.11.2013 and 26.12.2013 for termination of tenancy and demand for payment of arrears, hence, the landlord filed a suit for possession, arrears of rent and mesne profit. In the written statement, the Tenant/Appellant No. 1/Defendant No. 1 pleaded that the tenant-landlord relationship had come to an end as he had vacated the premises upon expiry of two years of agreement dated 14.11.2011. It was his contention that now it was his sister, the Appellant No. 2, who was in occupation of the subject property and was also the tenant of Respondent/Plaintiff. The trial court had decreed the suit for possession under Order XII Rule 6 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908.



The High Court held that the Trial Court has rightly decreed the suit for possession as either one of the Appellants/Defendants is a tenant and such a tenant is liable to vacate the property. It was observed that the Appellants were trying to create confusion regarding relationship of landlord-tenant between the parties. The Hon’ble Court further observed that once the tenant is evicted, the right of Appellant No. 2, living only as family member of the tenant, will also be extinguished in the suit premises. In passing the present order, reliance was placed on Order I Rule 7 which has to be resorted to where the plaintiff is in doubt about from whom the relief is to be sought.