Whether tenant is liable to be evicted if he puts structure on open space adjoining to tenanted premises?

 I agree with the view taken by the learned judges of the appellate Bench of the Small Cause Court that the premises appurtenant to the rented premises are certainly part of the premises themselves let out to the tenant. In my opinion, the contrary view will lead to certain anomalies, for example, the tenant who is occupying the premises, is using the passage for going and if a decree is passed against him for delivery of possession of a room which he is occupying he may as well occupy the passage itself and say that the Rent Court has no jurisdiction to evict him, which situation, I do not think, is contemplated by the legislature while using the expression "erection of permanent structure on the premises". In my opinion, in order to give a realistic meaning to the provisions, it will have to be held that any structures or additions made to adjoining space will have to be treated to have been made as a part of the premises appurtenant to the tenanted premises or as a part of space which is necessary for beneficial enjoyment of rented premises. I, therefore, think that the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner in this behalf is not well founded.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Writ Petn. No. 1157 of 1981

Decided On: 15.11.1984

Shridhar Govind Natu Vs. Ankush Krishnaji Sawant

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

S.J. Deshpande, J.

Citation: 33 Bom RC 1986

Print Page

What constitute permanent structure as per Transfer of property Act?

To sum up, no hard and fast rule can be prescribed for determining what is permanent or what is not. The use of the word ‘permanent’ in Section 108 (p) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is meant to distinguish the structure from what is temporary. The term ‘permanent’ does not mean that the structure must last forever. A structure that lasts till the end of the tenancy can be treated as a permanent structure. The intention of the party putting up the structure is important, for determining whether it is permanent or temporary. The nature and extent of the structure is similarly an important circumstance for deciding whether the structure is permanent or temporary within the meaning of Section 108 (p) of the Act. Removability of the structure without causing any damage to the building is yet another test that can be applied while deciding the nature of the structure. So also the durability of the structure and the material used for erection of the same will help in deciding whether the structure is permanent or temporary. Lastly the purpose for which the structure is intended is also an important factor that cannot be ignored.

Supreme Court of India

Purushottam Das Bangur & Ors. vs Dayanand Gupta on 31 October, 2012

Bench: T.S. Thakur, Gyan Sudha Misra

Citation: AIR 2013 SC 465

Print Page