By S.Bageerathan, Advocate, Practicing at Madras High Court
The Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (TNRRRLT Act) was introduced with the aim of regulating the relationship between landlords and tenants, balancing their rights and responsibilitiesand streamlining dispute resolution through a fast adjudication process. This Actreplaced the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, which had become outdated and was prone to misuse, especially by tenants. This article provides an in-depth analysis of key provisions of the 2017 Act, focusing particularly on Section 21(2)(a), which allows for the repossession of premises in cases where there is no written tenancy agreement.
Mandatory Registration of Tenancy Agreements and Tenant Rights Under the TNRRRLT Act
The Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act (TNRRRLT Act) mandates, under Section 4, that all tenancy agreements must be written and registered with the Rent Authority, making non-registered agreements unenforceable. The Madras High Court, while upholding the Act's constitutionality, clarified that Sections 4 and 4-A should not override existing laws like the Transfer of Property Act and Registration Act.
A key concern is Section 21(2)(a), which allows eviction when no written agreement exists, even if the tenant is willing to comply but the landlord refuses. Cases like S. Muruganandam vs. J. Joseph demonstrate how this provision can unfairly favor landlords, leaving tenants vulnerable despite their efforts to follow the law.
Judicial Precedents and Tenant Rights
In V. Manimegalai v. Selvaraj Kannan (2019), the Madras High Court upheld a landlord’s right to evict a tenant under Section 21(2)(a), even though the tenant was not directly at fault. The judgment highlighted the legal complexities surrounding unregistered tenancy agreements and the difficulties tenants face when landlords refuse to comply with the registration requirements.
Constitutional Validity of the Act
In the Madras High Court’s recent ruling, the constitutional validity of the TNRRRLT Act was upheld. The court emphasized that the Act falls under List III (Concurrent List) of the Constitution, allowing both the Centre and the State to legislate on matters concerning tenancy and rent control. The court found no conflict between the 2017 Act and other central laws, such as the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 or the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
However, the court did modify Sections 4 and 4-A to ensure that they did not exceed the purpose of the Act. The court’s interpretation prevents landlords from using the provisions of the Act to unfairly repossess premises without following due process or abiding by the written tenancy agreements.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 seeks to formalize and streamline landlord-tenant relations. However, provisions like Section 21(2)(a) raise concerns about fairness, potentially favoring landlords in eviction cases. To address these issues, reforms are needed: Clarify Section 21(2)(a) to prevent eviction if the landlord fails to formalize the agreement. Strengthen tenant protections to allow appeals against eviction when landlords are at fault. Promote awareness among both parties about the need for tenancy registration to prevent disputes.
These changes would create a more balanced and equitable rental market in Tamil Nadu.
Comments