Tenant’s Rent-Deposit Plea Filed After Old Rent Act’s Repeal Can’t Be Shifted To New Act After Missing Refiling Window: Madras HC

The tenant filed an application under Section 8(5) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (“Old Act”) to deposit rent, alleging that the landlord had refused rent from 5 February 2019.

The Old Act was repealed and the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (“New Act”) came into force on 22 February 2019; the tenant filed the deposit application on 20 March 2019.

The Rent Controller allowed the application, but the Rent Control Appellate Tribunal allowed the landlord’s appeal and held the application not maintainable.

The tenant challenged that decision under Section 25 of the Old Act, relying, among other things, on an earlier High Court direction to deposit rent and arguing that the application could be treated as one under Section 14 of the New Act.

Section 47(1) of the New Act repeals the Old Act; under Section 47(2), proceedings pending under the Old Act when the New Act commenced may continue and be disposed of under the Old Act.

The proviso to Section 47 provides a limited transition mechanism by which a party may withdraw a pending proceeding under the repealed Act and pursue a fresh application under the New Act within the prescribed period.

The Court held that this saving provision permits continuation of proceedings already pending at commencement, but does not itself authorize a party to institute a new proceeding under the repealed Act after commencement.

Section 14 of the New Act provides the relevant route for seeking deposit of rent under the new regime.

The deposit application was filed on 20 March 2019, after the Old Act had been repealed, so it was not a proceeding pending at the commencement of the New Act and could not benefit from Section 47(2)’s saving provision.

Although the landlord’s alleged refusal to accept rent predated repeal, the Court found no enabling provision allowing a post-repeal application under the Old Act based on that earlier cause of action.

The Court acknowledged that Rent Courts under the New Act were not constituted until 2 May 2019, but held that the proviso to Section 47 supplied a transition mechanism: the tenant could have withdrawn the proceeding and filed under the New Act within the prescribed window.

Having failed to use that mechanism, the tenant could not have the Old Act application treated as one under Section 14.

The earlier revision order directing deposit did not decide maintainability and therefore conferred no additional right; the Court also rejected the objection to the trust’s representation in light of the subsequent recognition of its hereditary trustee.

It directed the Rent Controller to permit the tenant to withdraw the amount deposited in the application and left the tenant at liberty to pursue any other remedy available in law.

No costs were ordered.