Sometime ago in Southern Nigeria, the landlord to one young man was not satisfied with the way of life of his tenant ( that is, this young man).This tenant would not cooperate with his landlord and his co-tenants in paying the bills for utilities that he shared with them. He used to bring home questionable characters at night.Also, he was always taking hard drugs and he would not return home until 12 midnight most times.Strange looking men and women were always flocking around him.His landlord had warned him on several occasions to desist from this habit but he turned deaf ears to the warning.When the landlord could no longer contain this recalcitrant tenant, he was pushed to the wall and decided to surprise him one day.
As they say, rest is sweet after labour. One day, the tenant returned home from work after a tedious day at work to take a cool bath and rest. To his utter shock, however, he met a big strange padlock on his door. His landlord had padlocked his room door.The landlord told him that he would not unlock the door until he was ready to pack out of his house.
No doubt that the landlord was exercising his right of ownership in the circumstances. Was he covered in law?
THE LEGAL POSITION
The law regulates the relationship between the landlord and the tenant such that the exercise of the rights of the former does not deny the latter his rights.In other words the law strikes a balance between both parties.In the above scenario, the tenant was actually due to be evicted from the house in view of his way of life but the mode employed by the landlord to eject him is what the law frowns upon.
There is a laid-down procedure in law for ejecting a tenant which the landlord ignored before taking the rash action he took against the tenant.First, he was supposed to issue the tenant a quit notice. At the expiration of the notice, he should serve him another statutory notice which is called notice of owner's intention to recover premises.He was to serve this if the tenant refused to quit at the expiration of the first notice.If at the expiration of the second notice, he still refused to quit, the landlord should sue him.It is only by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction that a landlord can evict a tenant from his house. The law frowns upon the self help mode employed by the landlord in the scenario.
In fact, a landlord that employs this mode of eviction in the scenario stands the risk of being sued by his tenant for trespass to property.
Thank you for reading
See you tomorrow.
DISCLAIMER: THE ENTIRE PUBLIC SHOULD TAKE NOTE THAT THE ABOVE STORY IS FICTION AND IT IS ONLY FOR EDUCATIVE PURPOSES AND IF IT, EITHER WHOLLY OR PARTLY, BEARS ANY SIMILARITY TO THE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF ANY INDIVIDUAL AT ANY PLACE OR POINT IN TIME, IT IS HEREBY AFFIRMED THAT IT IS A MERE COINCIDENCE.
PS: I want apologise to my esteemed readers for my inability to post on Friday, 5th June, 2015 as earlier promised. That date was my birthday and I was in a celebration mood that day.
As they say, rest is sweet after labour. One day, the tenant returned home from work after a tedious day at work to take a cool bath and rest. To his utter shock, however, he met a big strange padlock on his door. His landlord had padlocked his room door.The landlord told him that he would not unlock the door until he was ready to pack out of his house.
No doubt that the landlord was exercising his right of ownership in the circumstances. Was he covered in law?
THE LEGAL POSITION
The law regulates the relationship between the landlord and the tenant such that the exercise of the rights of the former does not deny the latter his rights.In other words the law strikes a balance between both parties.In the above scenario, the tenant was actually due to be evicted from the house in view of his way of life but the mode employed by the landlord to eject him is what the law frowns upon.
There is a laid-down procedure in law for ejecting a tenant which the landlord ignored before taking the rash action he took against the tenant.First, he was supposed to issue the tenant a quit notice. At the expiration of the notice, he should serve him another statutory notice which is called notice of owner's intention to recover premises.He was to serve this if the tenant refused to quit at the expiration of the first notice.If at the expiration of the second notice, he still refused to quit, the landlord should sue him.It is only by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction that a landlord can evict a tenant from his house. The law frowns upon the self help mode employed by the landlord in the scenario.
In fact, a landlord that employs this mode of eviction in the scenario stands the risk of being sued by his tenant for trespass to property.
Thank you for reading
See you tomorrow.
DISCLAIMER: THE ENTIRE PUBLIC SHOULD TAKE NOTE THAT THE ABOVE STORY IS FICTION AND IT IS ONLY FOR EDUCATIVE PURPOSES AND IF IT, EITHER WHOLLY OR PARTLY, BEARS ANY SIMILARITY TO THE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF ANY INDIVIDUAL AT ANY PLACE OR POINT IN TIME, IT IS HEREBY AFFIRMED THAT IT IS A MERE COINCIDENCE.
PS: I want apologise to my esteemed readers for my inability to post on Friday, 5th June, 2015 as earlier promised. That date was my birthday and I was in a celebration mood that day.
No comments:
Post a Comment