Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis iii. Clause (4) authorises the lessee to do any modification, changes in the suit property including structural changes, demolition and rebuilding of the premises either partially or completely as may be required by the lessee.

iv. Clause (8) gives unfettered right to the lessee to borrow money by using the premises as security and it also authorises the lessee, right to mortgage the suit property with banks, financial institutions and non- banking finance companies and others.

Clause (19) authorises the lessee to partially or completely sub-lease the premises.

21. Learned counsel for the appellant drew the attention of this Court that these clauses make it clear the respondent's only evil intention is that the appellant will not get the suit property after his life time. The terms of the lease agreement show that absolute right is given to the lessee to deal with the property by effecting mortgage, lease, making structural changes and demolition of the building. If such a third party right is created, the appellant's right would be greatly affected. Learned counsel for the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis appellant drew the attention of this Court that the respondent claimed himself as an absolute owner of the suit property in this lease deed, whereas, he is only a life interest holder.

22. Reading of this lease agreement shows that the respondent himself claimed to the absolute owner of the suit property. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant that the respondent is only a life interest holder of the suit property and he is not a absolute owner of the suit property. Therefore, the claim of the respondent that he is the absolute owner of the suit property is not correct. What is disturbing is that certain clauses created unfettered right in favour of the lessee Syed Ibrahim through this lease agreement. If these terms are given effect, there is absolutely no possibility of the appellant getting the suit property after the life time of respondent. Those clauses are clause nos.2,4,8 and 19. Clause (2) reads that lease is for a period of 29 years. At the time of execution of this lease agreement, the respondent was aged about 78 years. This lease agreement gets terminated as per this clause, only when he attains the age of 107 years. We may not know whether he would live for such a long period. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis It further recites that this lease is a renewable for two further terms by executing fresh deeds. If he lives to see the extension for further two like periods, the lease would come to an end only when he attains the age of 165 years. This clause is incorporated in the lease agreement only to deny her right in the suit property after the death of the respondent. Clause (4) gives authorization to the lessee to modify, change the existing structure/premises including structural changes, demolition and rebuilding the building partially or completely. In fact, the respondent authorizes the lessee to totally demolish the existing building and to construct a new one. This right is as an alien to lease hold right and against law. Clause(8) shows the unfettered right to borrow money by suing the suit property as security with banks, financial institutions, non-banking finance companies and others. There is also a right given for effecting partial or complete sub-lease by the lessee.