RAKESH JAIN Versus SURESH KUMAR KOHLI AND ANR.
(CM(M) 880/2012)(DELHI HIGH COURT)
38. Fundamentally, the concepts of joint tenancy and tenancy-in- common are different and distinct in form and substance. Therefore, the focal point for consideration is whether the petitioner, being a co- tenant, is having any right to get adjudicated in respect of the tenancy in question? The basic question which arises for consideration is whether the petitioner, being a legal heir of the deceased father, is a co-tenant or a joint tenant? In this context, it is important to note that the incidents regarding the co-tenancy and joint tenancy are different: joint tenants have unity of title, unity of commencement of title, unity of interest, unity of equal shares in the joint estate, unity of possession and right of survivorship.
39. ‘Tenancy-in-common’ is a different concept. There is unity of possession but no unity of title, i.e., the interests are differently held and each co-tenant has different shares over the estate. Thus, the tenancy rights, being property rights, by applying the principle of inheritance, the shares of heirs, are different, and ownership of lease hold rights would be confined to the respective shares of each heir; and none will have title to the entire lease hold property. Therefore, the estate shall be divided among the co-tenants, and each tenant in common has an estate in the whole of single tenancy. Consequently, the privity exists between the landlord and the tenant in common in respect of such estate.