“DRAFTING OF QUIT NOTICE”

FINAL DRAFT SUBMITTED IN THE PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE

COURSE TITLED –

DRAFTING,PLEADING AND CONVEYANCE

SUBMITTED TO: Prof. Dr. B.R.N SHARMA

FACULTY OF D.P.C.

SUBMITTED BY:

NAME: ISHAN BRAMHBHATT

COURSE: B.A., LL.B (Hons.)

ROLL NO: 1733

SEMESTER: 8TH

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NYAYA

NAGAR, MITHAPUR, PATNA – 800001
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Any project completed or done in isolation is unthinkable. This project, although prepared by
me, is a culmination of efforts of lots of people.

Firstly, I would like to thank our teacher DR. B.R.N. SARMA for his valuable suggestions
towards the making of this project.

Secondly, I would like to extend my gratitude towards the library staff for helping me with
the library resources.

Further to that, I would also like to express my gratitude towards my seniors who were a lot
of help for the completion of this project.

The contribution made by my classmates and friends are, definitely, worth mentioning. I
would like to express my gratitude towards my family members help also.

Last, but far from the least, I would express my gratitude towards the Almighty for obvious
reasons.

Thank You!
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER 1 – Introduction..................................................................................5

CHAPTER 2 – Form and Construction of Quit Notice.......................................8

CHAPTER 3 – Quit notice u/s 106, T.P. Act and Rent Control Act.................11

CHAPTER 4 – Model Formats...........................................................................14

CHAPTER 5 – Conclusion.................................................................................18

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 RESEARCH DESIGN

 METHODOLOGY: The researcher has opted for doctrinal method of research. This project
has been done based on thorough research work based on intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of
the project.

 SOURCES OF DATA : The researcher has used both primary and secondary data, primary
being Acts, Statutes and Case Laws and secondary being Books and Websites.

 MODE OF CITATION : The researcher has followed a uniform mode of citation through
the course of this project.

 HYPOTHESIS : The researcher has formed the following hypothesis, the validity for which
will be checked during the due course of this project –

“In order to get a decree or order for eviction against a tenant under a State rent
control act it is not necessary to give a notice under Section 106, Transfer of Property
Act.”

 RESEARCH QUESTIONS :

1. What is a notice to quit?

2. How is section 106 of T.P. Act relevant with quit notice?
3. Is quit notice followed by the eviction suit?
4. What are the form and contents of quit notice?
5. Is Section 106 applicable where agreement has been entered under the rent control
act of the State?
 CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION

A lease of an immovable property is a transfer of right to enjoy such property made for a
certain time, expressed or implied or in perpetuity in consideration, of a price paid or
promise, or of money, or of shared crops, service or any other thing of value to be rendered
periodically or on specified occasions to the transferor by the transferee who accepts such
terms and conditions.1 A lease is a transfer of interest in land and the interest transferred is
called the leasehold interest. The lessor, in an agreement of lease relinquishes his right to
enjoy the property during the term and retains that particular right in the hands of lessee. A
lease therefore has five essential ingredients, the parties; the subject matter or immovable
property; the demise or partial transfer; the term or period; and the consideration or rent.
Lease is governed by the terms of contract entered into and therefore, under ordinary law, a
landlord can evict his tenant on the expiry of period for which the premises were let out.2

A tenancy except where it is at will, may only be terminated at the expiry of period of
such notice of a specified duration under the contract, custom or statute governing the
premises in question. This can either be governed by the section 106 of the Transfer of
Property Act, 1882 or the respective State Rent Control Act as required under the particular
jurisdiction.

By the Transfer of Property (Amendment) Act, 2002, Section 106 was substituted and
it provided that the lease of immovable property for agricultural or manufacturing purposes
shall be deemed to be a lease from year to year, which may be terminated either by the lessor
or lessee by six months’ notice expiring with the end of the year of tenancy; and a lease of
immovable property for any other purpose shall be deemed to be a lease from month to
month, which may be terminated either by the lessor or lessee by fifteen days’ notice expiring
by the end of the month of the tenancy. 3 In a case, where the defendant had executed a
document in favour of the plaintiff by which the right to enjoy the pond, an immovable
property, for the purposes of pisciculture was given, and a certain amount was to be paid by
the plaintiff to the defendant, the period was also specified, the document was signed by both
the parties, and was also registered. It was held that the document was a lease and the

1
Section 105, Transfer of Property Act,
2
Vijay Kumar v. Inder Sain, AIR 1982 Del 260 (263).
3
Section 106, Transfer of Property (Amendment) Act, 2002.
plaintiff was a lessee from year to year.4 If the plaintiff continued in possession of the pond,
after the expiry of the lease period, the plaintiff was a lessee from year to year by holding
over and he could not be evicted from the pond by the defendant otherwise than by due
process of law, only after the termination of lease by notice under Section 106 of the T.P.
Act.

ESSENTIALS OF NOTICE-

1. A notice has to be very clear and must give at least 15 clear days to quit.
2. A notice terminating tenancy from the date of issue of the notice is not valid.
3. Notice to quit does not require any ground to be stated.
4. The notice should state clear words indicating the intention to have the premises
vacated within 30 days, failing which the tenant would be treated as trespasser and the
suit for ejectment will be filed is a valid notice.
5. A defective notice if accepted and acted upon will terminated the tenancy, but if not
acted upon does not terminate the tenancy and the landlord can withdraw the suit.

NOTICE TO BE GIVEN TO WHOM

Notice is to be given to the lessee or to his representative or even an assignee. Upon the death
of the original tenant, a notice terminating the tenancy, addressed to and served upon one of
the heirs of the original tenant who paid rent and acted on behalf of all the heirs of the
original tenant is sufficient.5 Where the tenants are joint, a notice to quit addressed to all the
tenants be served on one of them, is sufficient.6

SERVICE OF NOTICE

Notice to quit may be served personally or by post 7, at the residence, or by affixing it to the
property demised, but publication of a notice in a local paper8, or a telegraphic notice9, or sent
under ‘Certificate of Posting’ is not a valid notice. A notice served on the tenant, or his duly
authorised agent, is complete despite the fact that either he refused to take it, or it is received
by his family member or agent, not communicated to him.10

4
Bhola Nath v. Maharago Raja Saheb Bundi State, AIR 1984 All 60 (64)
5
H.C. Pandey v. G.C. Gaul, AIR 1989 1470.
6
Kanji v. Trustees of Port Bombay, AIR 1963 SC 468.
7
Jogendro v. Dwarka Nath, (1888) ILR 15 Cal 681.
8
Madan and Co. V. Watirjaimr Chand, AIR 1989 SC 630.
9
Kedar Nath v. Madhu Sudan, AIR 1923 Cal 682.
10
Interocean Shipping v. Lt. Col. YR Pun, (1991) 45 DLT 221.
CHAPTER 2: FORM AND CONSTRUCTION OF QUIT NOTICE
The section 106 requires the notice to be in writing, also it is required that it be signed as
well.11 The notice terminating the tenancy must be in respect of the property leased, and not
in respect of only a portion of the lease. If the tenant occupies land or property other than the
leasehold property, he is not to be treated as a tenant in respect of such excess land or
premises, unless there is any such contract, and in the absence of such contracts, the said
occupation would be that of a trespasser and, or an unauthorised occupant.

Splitting up of the tenancy by the unilateral act of the landlord or tenant is not
permissible.12 The notice must extend to all the premises.13 The landlord cannot breakup the
tenure. A notice for a fraction of holding is ineffective. It is not even good for the portion
concerned. However, an accidental omission to mention a part of the demised premises in a
notice which has been clearly understood has been upheld. The question whether the whole
of the premises occupied by the tenant is included in the notice or in the suit for ejectment, is
one of fact and if the tenancy is not split up, the notice would be valid.

The notice need not state to whom possession is to be given, but if it does so, it has to
be given with certainty. Notice to quit does not require any ground to be stated. A notice to
quit does not need to be construed strictly. The notice to quit must clearly and unambiguously
convey the intention of the landlord to terminate the tenancy and that in the case of tenancy
from month to month, it will be terminable by 15 days’ notice expiring with the end of the
month of tenancy.

In a notice under the section 106 of the T.P. Act, two requirements must be fulfilled-

1. It should give a notice of 15 days.

2. Expiring with the end of the month of tenancy.

In a case, the notice terminated the tenancy from the date of issue of notice which was held to
be not valid. It also gave 15 days notice to vacate, this period of 15 days also did not expire
with the end of month of tenancy. Since, both the requirements given above were not
satisfied, the notice was held to be invalid. It was held that the requirements under section
106 has to be complied strictly.14

11
Deo Nandan v. Meghu (1907) ILR 34 Cal 57.
12
Ghasi Ram v. Jagat Narain, AIR 1976 All 221.
13
Bhimaram v. Hoora Soondery (1921) 33 Cal LJ 616.
14
Kanta Manocha v. Hindustan Paper Corp (1998) 74 DLT 493.
CHAPTER 3: QUIT NOTICE UNDER SECTION 106, T.P. ACT AND
RENT CONTROL ACT
The Supreme Court in its decision in the case of V. Dhanpal Chettiar vs. Yesodai Ammal 15 in
1979 by a judgement of seven judges, overruled a number of its earlier decisions and several
rulings of the high court, have held that in order to get a decree or order for eviction against a
tenant under a State Rent Control Act, it is not necessary to give notice under Section 106,
T.P. Act. Determination of the lease in accordance with the T.P. Act is unnecessary and a
mere surplusage, because the landlord cannot evict the tenant even after such determination
of tenancy. Making out a case under the rent control Act for eviction of the tenant is, by
itself, sufficient and is not obligatory for the proceedings to be founded on a determination of
the lease by the notice under Section 106. The object of the section is merely to terminate the
contract, which the overriding rent Acts do not permit to be terminated.

The Supreme Court has held that, even after the termination of the contractual
tenancy, the landlord under the definition of the rent Acts, remains a landlord and a tenant
remains a tenant because of the express provision made in the enactment that a tenant means
a person continuing in possession after the termination of tenancy. 16 Yet another important
feature of the rent Acts is that either by way of non obstance clause or by necessary
implication, these enactments have done away with the law contained in section 108 of the
T.P. Act dealing with the rights and liabilities of the lessor and the lessee. The difference
between the positions obtained under the TP Act and the rent Acts in the matter of
determination of a lease is that under the TP Act, in order to recover the possession of leased
premises, determination of the lease is necessary, because, during the continuance of lease the
landlord cannot recover possession only on the fulfilment of the conditions laid down in the
relevant sections. He cannot recover possession by determining the tenancy. Nor can he be
stopped from doing so on the ground that he has not terminated the contractual tenancy,
unless such a requirement is also laid down in the rent Acts itself.

In a case, exemption was granted from the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Buildings
(Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, to religious and charitable institutions, it was held that a
civil suit could be filed by such institutions for recovery of possession on the basis of
tenancy, after issuing notice to quit under the TP Act. 17 A Full Bench of the Karnataka High
Court considering the decisions of the Supreme Court in Dhanpal Chettiar has held that the
observations of the Supreme Court were only with reference to the mode of determining the

15
1979 AIR 1745; 1980 SCR (1) 334.
16
Majati Subba Rao v. PVK Krishna Rao, AIR 1989 SC 2187.
17
Idol of Shri Kannika Parameswari Amman v. The Educational Trustee Co. Ltd. Madras, AIR 1990 Mad 337,
p 346.
lease by issuance of a notice in accordance with the section 106 of the TP Act, and it is not
possible to read this decision as laying down the principle that the entire contractual
relationship stands substituted by the statutory relationship under the rents Act for all
purpose, and that the rents Acts have done away with the concept of lease, and the interest
created by a valid contractual lease.18

CHAPTER 4: MODEL FORMATS

MODEL FORMAT 1:

18
Sri Ramkrishna Theatres Ltd. v. General Investements and Commercial Corp. Ltd., AIR 1993 Kant 90.
FACTS – Mr. M. Aditya entered into lease agreement with Mr. Kunal regarding the renting
of the apartment A-508 in Ajanta Heights, gurugram. The tenant has caused several damages
to the apartment during his stay and the landlord cannot face any more damages. So, a notice
to quit is being served.

NOTICE TO QUIT

S.K. Singh and Associates, Gurugram

A- 508
Ajanta Heights,
Sector 23, Gurugram,
Haryana.
NOTICE TO QUIT
Date: 28th February, 2020

I have the instructions of Mr. M. Aditya (hereinafter called ‘my client’) the Landlord
of the A-508, Ajanta Apartments, which you are occupying presently as a tenant in Sector
23, Gurugram, to give you a notice to quit and deliver possession of the said apartment on
or before the 20th day of March, 2020.
This is due to the reason that after the residing by you several damage has been done
to the apartment like broken doors and windows, the tiles on the floors being chipped and
damaged and exploiting of electricity and water resources in the apartment.
Furthermore, you are requested to settle all your outstanding rent, electricity bills,
rates and levies, and keep the apartment in a tenable condition before your departure.
TAKE NOTICE that in the even of your refusal to comply with the above demand, I
have the instructions of my client to institute a suit in a competent court of law, to eject
you forthwith.

S.K. Singh,
Advocate.

MODEL FORMAT 2:
FACTS- Mr. Ashish Ghosh and Mr. Abhinav Das entered into a lease agreement on 2nd
December, 2019 regarding the renting of the apartment in Vasudha Vihar, Kolkata, West
Bengal. The lease was on month to month basis, however the tenant was failing to give rent
consequently for several months and the due rent amounted to 25,000 rupees.

NOTICE TO QUIT

TERMINATION OF TENANCY FOR NON-PAYMENT OF RENT

To,
Mr. Ashish Ghosh,
C-12, Vasudha Vihar Apartments,
Kolkata, West Bengal (4***561)

You are notified that you owe rent in the amount of rupees 25,000 which does not include
any late fees to be paid which you may also owe.

If you do not pay this rent by the date specified below, which is seven days after the sending
of this notice, your tenancy is terminated and you will have to leave the premises, by 10th
April, 2020.

Date and time by which rent must be paid: 25th March, 2020 by 5pm.

If your pay your rent before the date and time given, you will not have to move out. But if the
rent is not paid duly, an eviction suit may be filed following this notice.

Date: 19th March, 2020

Yours Sincerely,
Abhinav Das
(Landlord)
Signature.

MODEL FORMAT 3:
FACTS- A lease agreement was entered into by mr. Shiv Bahadur Singh and Mr. Ram Babu
Sahay, where former is the lessor and later is lessee. Under that agreement, a land, L-08, in
Kaushambi District, Prayagraj, U.P. was leased for the purposes of growing of crops like
wheat and maize under common agricultural practice. There was a clause 14 which alspo
stated that no other operation will be carried out apart from agreed. The lessee here started a
construction of pond for fish keeping purposes which was against the agreed condition. The
lease deed was executed on 27th November, 2018.

NOTICE TO QUIT

- Nyaya Legal Solutions

Dated: 3rd January, 2020

To,
Ram Babu Sahay,
L-08, Tilhapur, Kaushambi Distt,,
Prayagraj, U.P (211**0)

Our Client : Mr. Shiv Bahadur Singh

Under the instructions received from and on behalf of our client above named, we do hereby
address you as follows.
1. The land L-08 in the Kaushambi district of Prayagraj, U.P was given to you on lease by
our client by a lease agreement dated 27th November, 2018.
2. That the land is of 6 acres and was leased for the purpose of conducting agricultural
operations for the growing of crops like wheat and maize.
3. That it was explicitly stated under clause 14 of the lease agreement that the land must be
used for no other purpose than the growing of crops by simple agricultural means.
4. That is was found out that you have been conducting some construction work in order to
build a pond for the purpose of practicing pisciculture as well, which is not covered
under the lease agreement and it specifically restraints any contruction by the lessee.
5. That it is therefore requested for you to vacate the premises six months after the issuing
of this notice that is by 5th July, 2020.
6. That it is also required that all the developments made till date in pursuance of
construction of pond must be removed and the land must be restored as it was before
vacating the premises.
7. That failing the vacating of land by the date mentioned, my client would go ahead and
file an eviction suit in a competent court of law.

Please treat this notice as a Notice under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

Thank you.
Yours Sincerely,
Jeevan Kumar
Advocate

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION
Notice to quit under section 106 is a technical rule. It should not be construed in a pedantic
and impractical way so as to pickholes and find fault with the notice. The aim of the
interpretation should be only to ascertain whether the person receiving the notice has
understood the same. A liberal construction would always enable to do practical justice to the
cause. The notice should be construed in such a way that it should not be defeated by the
inaccuracies in the language of notice specially in matters of description of premises, name of
tenant, or landlord, or date of expiry of the notice. The rule has been to make the lame and
inaccurate notices sensible where the recipient cannot have been misled as to the intention of
the giver. A liberal construction is put upon a notice to quit, so that it is not defended by
minor errors. Still it has to be considered that it is for the benefit of the lessee and so the
construction which deprives the tenant of the minimum period of notice stipulated in the
section is not permissible.

Notice must furnish requisite basis on which the claim was made, but is not a part of
cause of action although it is a condition precedent for the commencement of a suit. It only
provides a mode of procedure for getting a relief in cause of action and does not constitute
the relief itself.

As far as the hypothesis is concerned regarding the project, were it was whether
notice to quit has to be served under State Rent Control Act eviction has been proved to be
valid, where it has been held that in order to get a decree or order for eviction against a tenant
under a State Rent Control Act, it is not necessary to give notice under Section 106, T.P. Act.
Determination of the lease in accordance with the T.P. Act is unnecessary and a mere
surplusage, because the landlord cannot evict the tenant even after such determination of
tenancy. Making out a case under the rent control Act for eviction of the tenant is, by itself,
sufficient and is not obligatory for the proceedings to be founded on a determination of the
lease by the notice under Section 106. The object of the section is merely to terminate the
contract, which the overriding rent Acts do not permit to be terminated.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
ACTS-
Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Transfer of Property (Amendment) Act, 2002

BOOKS-
Darshaw J. Vakil, Transfer of Property Act, LexisNexis, 5th edition, Vol. 2, 2017

Dinshaw Fardunji Mulla, The Transfer of Property Act, LexisNexis, 12th edition, 2015

Poonam Pradhan Saxena, Property Law, LexisNexis, 2nd edition, 2006