Valid merger u/s. 111 [ d] of t.p.act

nilesh chawda (Querist) 18 November 2012 This query is : Resolved
Background : The Maha. Rent Control Act[M. R. C.A.2000]POSTULATES THAT all the agreement / document relating to creation of and transfer of tenancy must be registered.
Fact :In 2003, a person had purchased tenancy rights by transfer deed without involving landlord. the deed is unregistered. Stamp duty paid is Rs.100. The rent receipt was continued in the erstwhile tenant's name till date/2012.
In 2012, the landlord has offered to convert his tenancy in to ownership qua the existing structure i.e.without involvement of any new construction. The consideration is @ 120 month's rent.There was no privity of contract with the landlord in 2003.
Poser : In view of the provisions of M.R.C. there seems lack of valid, subsisting tenancy in the name of the present occupier. The Section 111 [ d] provides complete union of valid interest/ rights by theory of accretion.[DR.D.A.IRANI Vs. I.T.O. BOM H.C. BoM. C.R.]
WHETHER THE TITLE SHALL BE VALID IN THE HANDS OF THE PRESENT OCCUPIER POST EXECUTION OF DEED OF CONVERSION OF TENANCY RIGHTS IN TO OWNERSHIP?
FURTHER IN CONTEXT OF TITLE VERIFICATION
WHETHER IT IS DUTY OF THE ADVOCATE OF THE PURCHASER [AS WHEN THE SAID FLAT WILL BE SOLD ]TO VERIFY THE VERACITY OF TENANCY?
I.E. WHETHER HE CAN INSIST FOR PRODUCTION OF TENANCY SUPPORTING EVIDENCES? WHETHER THE DEAL LIKELY TO BE JEOPARDIZE?

Follow Query

Report Abuse