Introduction

• It is a landmark case of lease under Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (TPA)

Fact

• Dr. (Mrs.) C.L. Sury rented house No. 72, Babar Road, New Delhi from Dan Singh Bawa at a monthly rent of Rs. 37.82.
  • She passed away in October 1967.
• Following her death, the landlord, on 22^nd April 1968, filed a petition against Kenneth Solomon (appellant), seeking possession of the property under section 14(1)(b) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.
• The grounds for eviction were that Dr. Sury, during her lifetime, transferred possession of the property to Solomon without the landlord's written consent, and as she left no heirs, Solomon was the occupant.
• Solomon contested the claim, arguing that the original tenancy agreement with Dr. Sury remained valid and that he and another person were named as beneficiaries in her will dated 31^st March 1957.
  • He claimed that if the court did not recognize his inheritance under the will, he still inherited the tenancy rights as Dr. Sury's closest relative.
• The additional controller ruled that the tenancy rights were not specified in Dr. Sury's will, thus Solomon inherited them as her heir, and there was no relinquishment of possession.
  • Consequently, the eviction petition was dismissed.
• However, the Rent Control Tribunal overturned this decision, stating that Dr. Sury had bequeathed the tenancy rights to Solomon in her will, constituting a relinquishment of possession.
• Accordingly, an order for possession was granted to the landlord on October 28, 1976.
  • Feeling aggrieved, Solomon (appellant) filed the present appeal.

Issues Involved

• Whether the tenancy rights devolve on the appellant under the will?
• Whether the Act of disposing tenancy rights by will amount to parting with possession?

Observation

• A lease, under Section 105 of the TPA entails the transfer of the right to enjoy immovable property for a specified term or perpetually, in exchange for payment or services rendered to the transferor.
  • This right constitutes an interest in the property, granting the lessee possession.
• In testamentary matters, the residuary clause of a will encompasses both movable and immovable assets, excluding personal rights.
• The landlord argued that the tenant relinquished possession, invoking the undefined term "parted with the possession" from legal perspectives.
• It signifies relinquishing legal possession to an outsider, transferring not only physical but also the right to possession.
• This process initiates upon will execution but concludes at the testator's demise.
• The transfer of property excludes testamentary dispositions.
  • However, voluntary testamentary acts relinquish possession upon the testator's demise.
• Dr. Sury's bequeathing of tenancy rights constitutes such an act, entitling the landlord to eviction per proviso (b).

Conclusion

• The court concluded that the eviction rights arose from testamentary dispositions only upon the testator's demise.