Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

15. In view of Section 116 of the Evidence Act, 1872, the respondents were estopped from disputing the right and interest of the appellant viz a viz, the premises and the respondents to recover the rent payable in respect of the premises. In S.Thangappan v. P.Padmavathy AIR 1999 SC 3584, it has been held by the Supreme Court as follows:

"14. This section puts an embargo on a tenant of an immovable property, during the continuance of his tenancy to deny the title of his landlord at the beginning of his tenancy. The significant words under it are at the beginning of the tenancy. This is indicative of the sphere of the operation of this section. So a tenant once inducted as a tenant by a landlord, later he cannot deny his landlord title. Thus, this principle of estoppel debars a tenant from denying the title of his landlord from the beginning of his tenancy. Howsoever defective title of such landlord could be, such tenant cannot deny his title. But subsequent to his induction as tenant if the landlord looses his title under any law or agreement and there is threat to such tenant of his eviction by subsequently acquired paramount title holder then any denial of title by such tenant to the landlord who inducted him into the tenancy will not be covered by this principle of estoppel under this Section. In Mangat Ram (AIR 1987 SC 1656) (supra) this Court held (para 11):