Delhi HC order clarifies when tenants can be liable for mesne profits, says KSK’s Asha Kiran Sharma

A recent Delhi High Court order directing a tenant to pay ₹3.27 crore with 6% interest to the landlady highlights the distinction between continued tenancy and unauthorised occupation, said Asha Kiran Sharma. Speaking to ET Wealth Online, Sharma noted that the rent agreement had expired on December 31, 2004, and although it contained a renewal clause, the tenant was required to make a written request before its expiry. As no such request was made, there was no formal renewal of the agreement.

Asha explained that the courts nevertheless treated the parties’ subsequent conduct as an extension of the tenancy rather than a fresh lease, meaning that the tenant continued as a lawful month-to-month tenant and was not treated as a trespasser merely because there was no registered renewal document. This distinction was also relevant to the court’s treatment of mesne profits.

According to Asha, no mesne profits were awarded for the period from 2008 to 2012 because the tenant’s occupation during that period continued to be treated as authorised tenancy. Accordingly, the agreed rent was payable rather than damages for wrongful possession.

Sharma explained that mesne profits are distinct from rent and represent compensation for wrongful or unauthorised possession of property. They become relevant when a valid tenancy has come to an end and the occupant continues to retain possession without legal authority. The distinction between authorised tenancy and unauthorised possession is therefore central to determining when a landlord can claim mesne profits.

Read the full article here: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/legal/will/tenant-to-pay-rs-3-27-crore-with-6-interest-to-landlady-for-overstaying-after-rent-agreement-expiry-and-eviction-notice-delhi-hc-order/articleshow/134531327.cms 

Last Updated on 30 September, 2026