Written By:  Deepika Sethia

Amar had been residing in a rented apartment in  Delhi for 8 months. His lease explicitly set the rent at ₹35,000 for a term of eleven months. One evening, he received a brief message from his landlord stating that the rent would increase to ₹40,000 commencing the following month. There was no prior consultation, no specific clause referenced, and no explanation provided. When Amar inquired about the change, he was toldonly that rental rates in the area had risen.

What constitutes the breach here is not solely the increase itself but the underlying assumption. Once a rent has been agreed upon for a fixed term, it cannot be altered unilaterally during the contract solely due to changes in circumstances affecting one party. The contractual terms already resolve this issue.

Consider, however, a different scenario.

Rhea in Chennai was approaching the conclusion of her tenancy agreement. Approximately one month before its expiration, her landlord notified her that the rent would increase if she chose to renew the lease. The communication was clear, sent in advance, and provided her with sufficient time to make a decision. She engaged in negotiations, resulting in a moderated increase, allowing the tenancy to continue.

Both cases involve a rent increase; however, only one presents a problematic situation.

The critical distinction lies in the timing of the notification and mutual consent.

A tenancy is governed by the mutual agreement of the parties. Under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, such an agreement is not merelya formality but gives rise to binding obligations on both parties. Section 37 reinforces this position by requiring parties to perform the promises they have undertaken. In the context of a rental arrangement, this constitutes a clear reciprocal obligation: the tenant is required to pay the agreed rent, and the landlord is equally bound to adhere to that amount for the duration of the tenancy.

Any unilateral attempt to modify this agreement mid-term without the other party’s consent constitutes a breach.This is where confusion often arises. Rent increases are frequently communicated in a casual manner, a message, a call, or an offhand remark, replacing the formal process required. Such informal communication often leaves tenants uncertain and may lead them to believe that refusal is not an option.

However, refusal is indeed an option.

The initial step in addressing such issues is to consult the original agreement. If the rent is fixed for a certain period and no clause permits revisions during that interval, the rent remains unchanged. The landlord may request a change, but the tenant is under no obligation to accept.

Clarity rather than confrontation is advantageous in these situations. A brief written response affirming that the rent will continue as stipulated in the agreement often redirects the discussion to the contractual provisions. This approach shifts the focus from assumptions to the actual terms agreed upon.

If undue pressure persists, formal documentation of your position can helpshiftthe tone. Recording communications in writing diminishes the likelihood of informal coercion.

Conversely, it is important to recognise that rent is not fixed indefinitely. Once the contractual period concludes, the landlord may propose a new rent. At that juncture, the tenant has options: accept, negotiate, or vacate. This balance ensures fairness within the arrangement.

What is unacceptable is the unilateral removal of that choice during the contractual period.

Many disputes arise not from complex legal principles but due to a failure to review the agreement thoroughly at the outset. A well-drafted lease that explicitly states the rent, the duration, and conditions for revision reduces future disputes. Documenting key communications, even in amicable relationships, can be beneficial when questions later arise.

Tenants often hesitate to assess whether their interpretation of the agreement is correct or to respond without escalating. Structured guidance can significantly assist. Carefully reviewing the agreement, evaluating the landlord’s demand, and formulating a clear, non-confrontational response often resolves issues at an early stage. If the situation necessitates further action, approaching it in a measured manner prevents escalation.

Most conflicts are resolved once the real position is clarified.

If you find yourself in such circumstances, Parchai is available to assist.