Estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession
Section 122 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession. No tenant of immovable property, or person claiming through such tenant, shall, during the continuance of the tenancy or any time thereafter, be permitted to deny that the landlord of such tenant had, at the beginning of the tenancy, a title to such immovable property; The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
No tenant of immovable property, or person claiming through such tenant, shall, during the continuance of the tenancy or any time thereafter, be permitted to deny that the landlord of such tenant had, at the beginning of the tenancy, a title to such immovable property; and no person who came upon any immovable property by the licence of the person in possession thereof shall be permitted to deny that such person had a title to such possession at the time when such licence was given.
Section 122, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 116 Estoppel of tenants and of licensee of person in possession Text carried over almost unchanged 91%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Rajendra Prasad vs Mishri Lal (dead) Represented by His Lr. Smt. Savitri Devi
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 116, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a property is owned by co-owners, any co-owner can maintain a suit for eviction of a tenant without joining other co-owners if the other co-owners do not object. The status of a landlord under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings Act is determined by who receives or is entitled to receive rent, not by formal proof of title through will. Once a final compromise decree has established ownership, the appellants' locus standi to maintain an eviction suit cannot be questioned solely on the ground that the will basis for that ownership was not formally proved with evidence. A tenant is estopped from denying the landlord status of persons succeeding to the rent-collection rights, particularly after receiving explicit notice identifying them as landlords. Deposits of rent in court under Section 30 of the Act are invalid and do not constitute payment or compliance with the Act when made with knowledge that the actual landlords are demanding the rent elsewhere.
On this section: Tenant is estopped from denying landlord's title during continuance of tenancy. Court applied this to hold respondents estopped from questioning appellants' landlord status after admitting Chameli Devi and Bhola Nath as landlords.
-
Payal Vision LTD vs Radhika Choudhary
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 116, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In a suit for recovery of possession from a tenant whose tenancy is not protected under the Rent Control Act, a decree for possession can be granted under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the basis of admissions if: (1) The jural relationship of landlord and tenant is clearly admitted, which admission can be inferred from the defendant's acknowledgment of the execution of a lease deed and payment of agreed rent, regardless of the nature of use (residential or commercial) or whether the lease was registered; (2) The termination of tenancy is admitted or proven, either by lapse of time or by service of a valid notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act; and (3) A tenant is estopped under Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act from denying the landlord's title even when the challenge is based on documents anterior to the commencement of the tenancy, provided the tenant has acknowledged the landlord's title by entering into the tenancy agreement.
On this section: Section 116 provides that a tenant cannot deny the title of the landlord from whom they hold the property. The Court extensively analyzed this provision and held that it estops a tenant from denying the landlord's title even when the challenge is based on a document that predates the commencement of the tenancy. The Court applied this to prevent the tenant from claiming that the land vested in the Gram Sabha when the tenancy commenced after the purported vesting order.
-
Tresa Correia vs Chandralekha James Anthony and 2 ORS
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 116, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a tenant or person claiming through a tenant takes the sole defense of denying the landlord's title during the continuation of tenancy, such defense is barred under Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (now Section 122 of Bharatiya Sajshya Adhiniyam, 2023). In such circumstances, the bare denial of the landlord's case without raising any other substantial and valid defense amounts to deemed admission of the jural relationship between landlord and tenant, and the court is entitled to pass judgment on admission under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, without requiring full trial.
On this section: Estoppel of tenant - no tenant or person claiming through tenant can during continuation of tenancy deny title of landlord at beginning of tenancy
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 122
What have the courts held on Section 122 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Rajendra Prasad vs Mishri Lal (dead) Represented by His Lr. Smt. Savitri Devi (21 Mar 2017) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 116, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Tenant is estopped from denying landlord's title during continuance of tenancy. Court applied this to hold respondents estopped from questioning appellants' landlord status after admitting Chameli Devi and Bhola Nath as landlords. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2012 to 2026.
How do I find court cases under Section 122 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BSA 122, section 122 BSA, section 122 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. People searching for it also type 122 bsa act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Rajendra Prasad vs Mishri Lal (dead) Represented by His Lr. Smt. Savitri Devi (21 Mar 2017).
What should I read with Section 122 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. It carries forward IEA 116 (Estoppel of tenants and of licensee of person in possession), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 122 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 122 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 122, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 26. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant1128 words
- 12. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling1076 words
- 95. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement815 words
- 2. Definitions794 words
- 6. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct773 words
- 63. Admissibility of electronic records764 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.