Skip to main content

Legal Capsule by LexCounsel


Possibility of Non-Payment of Lease Rent Due to COVID-19


Amidst the outbreak of novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) and its consequential countrywide lockdown, shutting down majority of the commercial, industrial and retail activities, the much forgotten ‘Force Majeure’ clause in contracts and leases is now receiving close scrutiny. In simple terms, ‘Force Majeure’ events relieve a party from performance of its contractual obligations, without any consequential breach of the contract, provided such performance is adversely impacted by events outside the control of an affected party such as act of God, natural disaster, war, strike, lockout, epidemic, Government orders, etc. 

The Ministry of Home Affairs vide its order dated March 29, 2020, in exercise of its powers conferred under Section 10(2)(l) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, directed all State/Union Territory Governments and State/Union Territory Authorities to take necessary actions and issue necessary orders, inter alia, for waiver of rent for workers by landlords for a period of one month. However, the Government has not yet issued any order/notification with respect to suspension or waiver of lease rentals for commercial lease contracts entered into by businesses. 

In the absence of any relief or clarity by the Government on the performance of obligation to pay lease rentals under commercial lease agreements, business entities and retail outlets are struggling with no sales and revenue but still saddled with ongoing rent and employee payment obligations and are vigorously evaluating the ‘Force Majeure’ clause under their respective agreements. This newsletter attempts to respond to some of the frequently asked questions related to payment of rent during the present COVID-19 crises. 

Can the Lessee Apply a Force Majeure Event as a Reason for Non-Payment of Lease Rent? 

Relief from payment of rent due to a ‘Force Majeure’ event can only be availed if such a relief is explicitly provided under the lease agreement. Generally, lease agreements excuse the lessees from payment of rent during a Force Majeure event if there is a damage or destruction of the property leading to its unavailability for use by the lessee and they do not provide blanket waiver from payment of lease rentals on occurrence of every Force Majeure event. As Force Majeure is a contractual right, the express wordings of the clause has to be carefully assessed and the lessee cannot, as a matter of right, invoke non-payment due to a Force Majeure event in the absence of a supporting clause and/or a specific rent waiver agreed under the contract. If the lease agreement does provide for stoppage of rent or suspension of all obligations during a Force Majeure period without any qualifications or riders, then the lessee should immediately exercise its right by issuing a letter to the lessor invoking Force Majeure event and intimating cessation of its obligation to pay lease rental during the period the Force Majeure event continues. 

Can the Lessee apply the Principle of Frustration of Contract for Non-Payment of Lease Rent in the absence of a Force Majeure Clause? 

While Force Majeure is not specifically covered under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, (“IC Act”), reference to the concept of force majeure can be derived from Section 32 and Section 56 of the IC Act. If the contract itself either impliedly or expressly contains a term, according to which performance would stand discharged under certain circumstances, the dissolution of the contract would take place under the terms of the contract itself and such cases would be dealt under Section 32 of the IC Act. If however an untoward event or change of circumstance totally upsets the very foundation upon which the parties entered into their agreement, the contract can be held to be frustrated under Section 56 of the IC Act. [refer Energy Watchdog vs Central Electricity Regulatory Commission and Ors. (2017) 14 SCC 80]. But it is pertinent to note that Section 56 is applicable only if the contract does not have an explicit Force Majeure clause. 

The Indian courts have generally taken the view that Section 56 of IC Act is not applicable when the rights and obligations of the parties arise under a transfer of property under a lease. The doctrine of frustration belongs to the realm of law of contracts and it does not apply to a transaction where, not only privity of contract but a privity of estate has also been created in as much as lease is the transfer of an interest vis-à-vis the immovable property within the meaning of Section 5 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 [refer Raja Dhruv Dev Case in T. Lakshmipathi and Ors. vs. P. Nithyananda Reddy and Ors. AIR (2003) SC 2427]. 

In view of the foregoing, in the absence of a Force Majeure clause under the lease agreement, it is unlikely that a lessee can claim frustration of contract (which eventually leads to termination of the contract and may, therefore, not assist the lessee in the long run) and seek waiver of lease rental as consequence of a Force Majeure event.

What is the Way Forward for Lessees? 

Considering that the lessees do not have a right to seek waiver or suspension of lease rentals in the absence of an explicit Force Majeure clause supporting such waiver/suspension, the lessees will have no option but to issue notices to their respective lessors requesting waiver or suspension of lease rentals owing to the unprecedented situation of complete shutdown of commercial activities by the Government of India. Unless the Government issues any relaxation from payment of rent in the near future, cordial negotiation with the landlords for waiver or suspension of lease rentals is the best way forward for the businesses who do not have explicit supporting Force Majeure provisions in their lease agreements. Unilateral decision not to pay rent may lead to termination of the lease agreement by the lessor for breach of the agreed payment terms and therefore amicable discussions among parties is the best way forward. 

For more COVID 19 related articles, please refer to https://lexcounsel.in/articles-2020/ and for COVID 19 related legal updates, please refer to https://lexcounsel.in/newletters/newsletters-2020/.

If you have any question or would like additional information on the material covered in this Newsletter, please contact the authors below:

Seema Jhingan, Partner (sjhingan@lexcounsel.in)

Ankit Sahoo, Associate (asahoo@lexcounsel.in)

Popular posts from this blog

EY Tops League Table for Transaction Advisors to M&A deals in 24

Moelis & Company & PwC claim the No.2 & No.3 slots Ernst & Young  (EY) topped the Venture Intelligence League Table for Transaction Advisor to M&A Deals   during 2024, advising 34 deals worth $4.1 Billion. Moelis & Company stood second advising 2 deals worth $3.9 billion. PwC followed with 18 deals worth $3.3 billion. Citi ($2.5 billion across 1 deal) and Advay Capital ($2.3 billion across 1 deal) completed the top five. Among the largest M&A deals in 2024, Citi  advised $2.5 Billion acquisition of the Indian business of American Tower Corporation by Brookfield , Advay Capital and Moelis & Company advised the $2.3 Billion acquisition of Care Hospitals by Aster DM Healthcare . Jefferies & Co., JP Morgan and Moelis & Company advised the $1.6 Billion acquisition of Bharat Serums & Vaccines by Mankind Pharma.  Among the other notable M&A deals in Q4 2024, EY advised the $685 million acquisition of ITD Cementation ...

Morgan Stanley tops League Table for Transaction Advisors to M&A deals in 2020

Morgan Stanley , which advised the $10.1 Billion strategic investment by Facebook and Google into Reliance Industries' telecom arm Jio platforms (among other Private Equity investments in the company), topped the Venture Intelligence League Table for Transaction Advisor to M&A Deals for 2020. Ambit Corporate Finance - which advised 3 deals worth $4.0 Billion, including Brookfield's $3.7 Billion acquisition of Reliance Tower Infrastructure Trust -  took the second spot. JM Financial ($3.7 Billion across 5 deals), Metta Capital ($3.4 Billion across 3 deals) and ICICI Securities ($3.4 Billion across 2 deals) - all of whom (along with Citi) are advisors to the $3.4 Billion acquisition of Future Group's retail related ventures by Reliance Retail, announced in August - completed the top five. The  Venture Intelligence League Tables , the first such initiative exclusively tracking transactions involving India-based companies, are based on the value of PE and M&A tra...

Everything you wanted to know (and some things you didn't care to know) about ChrysCapital's Ashish Dhawan

New Delhi-based private equity fund ChrysCapital is vastly different from its former avatar, Chrysalis Capital. While Chrysalis began life (in Mumbai) as an venture capital firm focussed on start-up investments, today's ChrysCapital is best know for its late-stage investments (often in already public companies). The fascinating part of this transformation is that one of the fund's original partners - Senior Managing Director Ashish Dhawan - has been firmly in the driver's seat throughout the process. It's a story that needed to be told. As a cover story. Kudos to Business Today for telling it first. Thankfully, unlike the glowing profiles that BT is famous for - including the one featuring infamous stock brocker Harshad Mehta with his Lexus on the cover - this one has a lot of facts. Some well known. And others less so. That ChrysCapital's first fund would have been a disaster but for the pioneering investment in Raman Roy founded BPO firm Spectramind i...

Why did Sony Entertainment Television's CEO quit?

Businessworld has a cover story on the corporate battle that resulted in Kunal Dasgupta, the CEO of Multi Screen Media (formerly Sony Entertainment Television), quitting just a few months before his contract was due to end. Dasgupta’s abrupt exit was the culmination of six years of tension between majority shareholder Sony Pictures Television International (SPTI) that owns 61 per cent of MSM, on one hand, and Atlas Equifinn on the other, which is a consortium of Indian shareholders (Singapore-based Rakesh Aggarwal, World Media Group director Sudesh Iyer, Shemaroo Entertainment Managing Director Raman Maroo, MobiApps Holding’s Jayesh Parekh, B.R. Sule, Sushil Shergil and actor Jackie Shroff ) holding 32 per cent. Capital Japan and some financial institutions own the rest 7 per cent. And of course, the third protagonist is Dasgupta, who walked a tightrope and managed to keep his job for over 14 years despite the fact that neither group of shareholders was too happy with him. Very little...

APEX VC Awards: Chiratae Ventures, Blume Ventures, Elevation Capital, Stride Ventures & Alteria Capital judged best funds of 2021

Press Release Elevation Capital , Chiratae Ventures , Blume Ventures , Stride Ventures and Alteria Capital were voted the top Venture Capital investors in India during 2021. The Venture Intelligence “Awards for Private Equity Excellence” (APEX) is dedicated to celebrating the best that the Indian Private Equity & Venture Capital industry has to offer. "VCs exist because Entrepreneurs exist and disrupt the ecosystem by creating new businesses. We are very excited to be part of the secular trend of tech disruption that would power India’s journey towards $ 10 Trillion economy over the next decade," said  T C Meenakshi Sundaram, Founder & Vice Chairman, Chiratae Ventures , winner of " VC Fund raise of the Year " award.  " We wish to thank all our entrepreneurs who have chosen to take funding from Chiratae Ventures and investors who have backed us with funds over the past 15 years in this journey.  Congratulations to the entire Chiratae Ventures team and ...