The Delhi High Court has ruled that a tenant purchasing a co-owner’s share of a property does not become the full owner, and such a purchase does not end the landlord-tenant relationship. The Court upheld the eviction order against the tenant.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a ruling on property and rent control law, the Delhi High Court has held that a tenant purchasing a share of the tenanted property from one co-owner does not become the full owner, and such a transaction does not terminate the landlord-tenant relationship. The Court clarified that the doctrine of merger under Section 111(d) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, applies only when the ownership interests of both tenant and landlord in the entire premises vest in one person simultaneously.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Saurabh Banerjee, who dismissed a revision petition filed by tenant Sukhdev @ Sukhdev Raj and upheld the eviction order passed by the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) on August 13, 2024.
Background of the Dispute
Landlord Ashok Kumar filed an eviction petition under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 25(B) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, seeking recovery of possession of two commercial shops at Property No. 6165/1, Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, citing bona fide need to open a restaurant/dhaba.
The tenant contested the petition, claiming he had become the owner of the premises after purchasing the property through a Sale Deed dated December 15, 2016, from the landlord’s sister and co-owner, Smt. Manju Devi, who held a 50% share under a Settlement Agreement dated April 24, 2015.
Arguments Before the Court
Tenant’s Contentions
Represented by Senior Advocate Sanjeev Sagar, the tenant argued:
- The Sale Deed transferred ownership and extinguished the lease.
- The landlord-tenant relationship ceased to exist.
- The ARC ignored the application filed by Manju Devi under Order I Rule 10 CPC, showing an ownership dispute.
Landlord’s Response
Represented by Advocate Alok Sinha, the landlord submitted:
- Manju Devi could not legally transfer the entire property as she was only a 50% co-owner.
- The doctrine of lis pendens hit the Sale Deed due to a pending civil suit, CS No. 88/2017.
- Citing Pramod Kumar Jaiswal & Ors. vs. Bibi Husan Bano (2005), purchase of a share by a tenant does not dissolve tenancy.
ALSO READ: Landlord’s Need Cannot Be Questioned by Tenant: Delhi High Court
Court’s Findings and Observations
Doctrine of Merger Inapplicable
The Court ruled that tenancy cannot be determined unless landlord and tenant interests in the entire property merge:
“Until the entirety of rights/interest/title vested at the same time with one person, there is no merger of estate.”
Sale Deed Ineffective
Relying on SK. Golam Lalchand vs. Nandu Lal Shaw (2024), the Court held:
“A co-owner cannot sell the entire property without partition.”
Eviction Petition Maintainable
The Court reiterated that a co-owner may maintain an eviction petition without requiring consent from others (Indian Umbrella Manufacturing Co.; Mohinder Prasad Jain).
Suspicious Conduct of Tenant
The Court noted the Sale Deed was executed after the filing of the eviction case, raising doubts about bona fides.
The High Court upheld the eviction order, vacated the interim stay, and directed the tenant to hand over physical possession of the property.
“The tenant is unable to raise any grounds for interference; the impugned judgment dated 13.08.2024 is upheld.”
Case Title:
Sukhdev @ Sukhdev Raj vs. Ashok Kumar
RC.REV. 311/2024, CM APPL. 64579/2024, CM APPL. 23881/2025
Click Here to Read More Reports on Rented Property