Supreme Court says tenancy not ended by agreement to sell without surrender of possession

The case concerns a dispute between a tenant-petitioner and landlord-respondents regarding whether the landlord-tenant relationship ceased upon the execution of an agreement to sell, where the tenant had paid part of the consideration but the sale did not complete.

Petitioner: Nazim Shaikh Hasan; Respondents: Nasir Mushtaq Shaikh and others; Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra.

• The Court analyzed whether the tenancy ended upon the execution of the agreement to sell.
• The Court distinguished the present case from R. Kanthimathi v. Beatrice Xavier, noting the current agreement lacked stipulations indicating possession was surrendered under the sale agreement or that rent obligations ceased.
• The Court examined the concepts of express and implied surrender under Section 111 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.
• The Court noted that the agreement to sell in this case contained a clause stating it would stand cancelled if the loan was not sanctioned, requiring the refund of the initial payment and handover of possession.

Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.

The original document