Landlord Is Liable To Maintain The Premises

Font Size

Print

Feedback

Email

Discuss

: My father had rented commercial premises in Delhi and after his demise, I have been running a shop from these premises. My landlord insists on receiving the rent of Rs 450 per month in cash and issuing two receipts every month—one for Rs 350 which he signs himself and the other for Rs 100 as maintenance charges that his son signs. As far as I am aware my father was paying a composite rent of Rs 450 and I am, therefore, wondering as to why he is insisting on collecting the rent issuing two receipts in different names. Is there a catch somewhere?

My landlord has been pressurising me to vacate the premises on the ground that commercial tenancies are not inheritable. He has written to me questioning the expenditure that I have incurred in renovating the bathroom attached to these premises at my own cost. I understand that a landlord cannot object to such expenditure.

My landlord despite reminders has failed to whitewash the premises and undertake essential repairs for the past five years. Can I undertake these repairs and deduct the cost from the rent payable? Tthe landlord has also threatened to cut off the water and electric supply to the premises occupied by me. Can he legally do this?
—V K Agarwal, Delhi

A landlord, if he so desires, can collect rent up to Rs 2,500 per month in cash from his tenant. However, it is mandatory for him to issue a rent receipt. Under the Delhi Rent Control Act, the landlord is liable to maintain the premises. Therefore, there does not seem to be much point in his issuing a separate maintenance receipt unless, of course, there has been a subsequent agreement between him and his tenants whereby he is required to provide some additional services such as security, common area lighting and an underground water storage tank with a booster pump to his tenants for a fee. Firstly, check with your co-tenants whether there was any agreement reached between the landlord and the tenants on this behalf and whether the landlord is providing some services that were originally not provided by him. If this is indeed the case then the landlord would appear to be within his rights to collect maintenance charges under a different name.