by Shivendra Pratap Singh | May 25, 2025 | Civil Matter
What to do if lessor destroyed the premises let out? If my landlord destroys the premises let out deliberately to remove me from the place, in that situation what would be my legal action? I am very afraid that the lessor will destroy the shops which have let out after building by the lessee. This question is the follow up of my previous question. I am asking this question because there is high probability that the lessor may destroy the shops. His son has made an agreement with a local builder for erecting a shopping complex. Presently the property became worthy after development of some residential apartment in the vicinity. The lessor's son has a plan to eliminate me from the land and enter into an agreement with builders to avail the maximum profit and regular monthly income. Hence, he is pressurizing me to leave the shop.
Asked from: Bihar
If the premises are destroyed by the act of the lessor, the lessee has the option to declare the lease void and also claim compensation. It is, however, a settled principle of law that both the structure and the land form a composite part of the lease. Therefore, the lessee can retain possession of the land. The destruction of the structure does not automatically render the lease void, nor does it terminate the legal relationship between the lessor and the lessee.
If the premises or structure are destroyed to the extent that they become unfit for the purpose for which they were let out, the lessee is still bound to pay rent. In such circumstances, retaining possession after the destruction of the structure may be detrimental to you, as you would continue to be liable to pay rent to the lessor.
Under Section 108(B)(e) of the Transfer of Property Act, you have the option to declare the lease void. Upon exercising this option, you will no longer be liable to pay rent and will also be entitled to claim compensation.
In accordance with the settled principle of law, after the destruction of the shops, as a lessee, you cannot erect new structures without the written permission of the lessor. If the lessor is responsible for the destruction, it is unlikely that such permission will be granted. Therefore, to avoid rent liability and to recover the loss caused by the lessor’s unlawful act, you may claim compensation and also declare the lease void.
What to do if lessor destroyed the premises let out? In such a situation, you should exercise your right under Section 108(B)(e) of the Transfer of Property Act. The above action would constitute the appropriate legal action by the lessee against the lessor.
Related: Landlord is forcibly vacating premises
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | May 25, 2025 | Civil Matter
Landlord is forcibly vacating premises by creating hurdles in accessing that property. In the year of 2019 the landlord created a lease for next thirty years. I constructed three shops, and rent has been paid to the landlord after deducting eighty percent rent in cost of construction. Total rent for the shops is sixty-five thousand monthly. After three years the son of landlord started problems and mounting pressure to vacate the shops. When I refused to vacate because the lease has been created for thirty years. But he along with some local goons preventing access to the shops and also annoying my customers. Now he is erecting a wall in front of shops to completely deny the access. He is just started the work. I have discussed the issue with the landlord, but he shows helplessness in front of his son.
Asked from: Bihar
There is no dispute that the landlord has let out the land, and the lease is valid until 2039. The lessee has erected three shops on the land and has been paying rent to the landlord after deducting the construction cost. Your legal status as a lessee has never been denied by the landlord. As a lessee, you have certain rights, including the right to enjoy the property until the determination of the lease.
In the present circumstances, you should file a civil suit for an injunction to restrain the landlord from constructing a wall in front of the shops. The landlord cannot take any action that renders the lease unfit for the purpose for which it was granted.
In the said civil suit, you should also file an application for interim relief under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking an interim injunction. You should request the court to restrain the defendant from constructing a wall in front of the shops.
It is a settled principle of law that when a structure is leased, the land upon which the structure is built is considered an integral part of the lease. Hence, the land on which the shops have been constructed is also a component of the lease. Therefore, you have the right to restrain the defendant, i.e., the lessor, from taking any action that is detrimental to the lease. Landlord is forcibly vacating premises in violation of law.
Related: Father gave property to sons only by oral partition
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | May 23, 2025 | Service Matters
Disciplinary authority is hearing my appeal even after my objection. A departmental enquiry was initiated against me, and the current appellate authority was disciplinary authority in that time. He had appointed an enquiry officer and initiated disciplinary inquiry against me. I have filed my objection to transfer my appeal to another competent authority, but he did not take any decision on my objection. He is adamant to decide the appeal.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
It is against the principle of natural justice. No one should be a judge in their own case. This principles ensure fairness and prevent bias in administrative and judicial action. Disciplinary proceeding is a quasi-judicial proceedings. Hence, the authority is bound to follow the principles of natural justice.
When he was disciplinary authority and punished the delinquent. He later on cannot hear appeal of same punishment order in the capacity of appellate authority. You should file a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India for change of appellate authority. It is gross violation of law that same person is hearing appeal of his own order.
Move a writ petition, the high court will definitely direct him to transfer the appeal to another competent authority. If the appeal authority passed any order in your case that order will also be illegal and quashed by the high court. Disciplinary authority is hearing appeal in gross violation of law.
Related: Member of DPC favoured a candidate in promotion
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | May 23, 2025 | Civil Matter
Father gave property to sons only by oral partition and later on a testamentary will not executed. That testamentary will is neither registered nor probated by my brothers. My brothers are very influential, and they have forcibly taken possession and ownerships over that land. We two sisters have been excluded from the property whereas we also have right in that property. It was my father's self-acquired property, and all the legal heirs have equal right and title in that property. There is no witness about the oral distribution of property to my three brothers. They are claiming that in 2008 my father orally divided the property and in 2019 he written a testamentary will. Two witnesses were signed that will. Since that will is forged and fabricated then my brothers never registered that will and also not take probate. We have filed a civil suit for partition of property according to Chirstian law.
Asked from: Maharashtra
The legal fiction of joint family property and joint possession of coparceners is not applicable under Christian law. Therefore, your father had the absolute right to divide the property in his lifetime. If he divided the property among his three sons, even if done orally, that partition is legally valid. You cannot later challenge that partition or division of property solely on the grounds that it was an oral division made by your father.
It is also important to note that your father made a written document in the form of a testamentary will. This document will be admissible as evidence to prove that an oral division was made by the owner, i.e., your father.
Although your father’s testamentary will was not registered, it can still be used as a piece of evidence to demonstrate the intentions or conduct of the deceased author. If, in that document, the author admitted to having divided the property among his sons and excluded his daughter, it shall serve as relevant documentary evidence to prove the division of property by the owner.
Since the property has already been divided by the owner, the court will not interfere. The property cannot be re-divided under the Partition Act. The validity of the will cannot be questioned in a civil suit merely because the document is unregistered. It is relevant as a piece of documentary evidence only, however, no rights have been transferred or affected by that document i.e. unregistered will. Your plea that father gave property to sons only by oral partition seems very weak.
Related:
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | May 22, 2025 | Criminal Matter
Victim has the right to oppose bail application of accused. A person has made false document of my land and tried to sell. When I came to know about it then immediately made a complaint to the District Magistrate. The DM referred the matter to the SDM for enquiry. After the enquiry the SDM found that the allegation is true. He submitted the report to the DM. The DM has directed the Tehsildar to lodge first information report against the person who had prepared false documents. That person has been arrested and in jail. When the accused applied for bail, I appeared in the court for opposing the bail application. The court refused to hear me. Court said that the prosecution is already on record and appearing for opposing bail application then you cannot be a party at this stage. I want to be a party and present in the court for contesting the bail of accused.
Asked from: Chhattisgarh
The victim has the right to oppose a bail application, as they are entitled to appear in any proceeding. According to Section 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the term "victim" has been defined. As per this definition, the victim’s guardian and legal heir are also included as victims. The court cannot prevent the victim from participating in proceedings from the stage of the First Information Report (FIR) onward.
In this case, although the FIR was lodged by the Tehsildar under the direction of the District Magistrate, you are the actual victim of the offence. The accused attempted to sell your land using forged documents. As the victim, you have the right to appear through your advocate at the stages of both trial and appeal. The Supreme Court, in Jagjeet Singh vs. Ashish Mishra (2022), held that the victim has the right to be heard in a bail application. The court cannot exclude the victim from any stage of the proceeding.
Related: Rape in false promise of marriage during ten years of relationship
