Tenant has no right to question landlord’s business

Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao of the High Court at Hyderabad ruled in a recent verdict that it ill suits a tenant to even contend that since the land owner was a lady she cannot carry on business on her own. He further ruled that which of the alternative premises of the owner he should let out and which he should use for his requirements.

The judge was dealing with a revision petition under the Rent Control Act filed by the tenant. A non-residential premises in Kakinada was subject matter of the litigation that started in 2009. The tenant, in fact, inherited the tenancy from his father, who was the original tenant. It was a tenancy of about four decades. The landlord pleaded wilful default in payment of rents and also bona fide requirement of the premises.

Though the Rent Control Court dismissed the petition, the Appellate court ordered eviction. In the present revision, Justice Ramamohana Rao ruled that it does not lie in the mouth of the tenant to contend that the landlord, a woman, cannot carry on business. “It is time that one should realise that the Indian women are asserting their right to lead a life of dignity on their own without sacrificing their family interests by undertaking suitable business activity”.

He further ruled that it is not for the tenant to demand the landlord to disclose the nature of business that the landlord proposes. Even the fact that an alternative premises that was rented out independently did not disqualify the landlord from the right to the premises.