Lease surrender and rent liability continue until vacant possession is actually redelivered to the landlord.

A tenant's letters may operate as notice of termination, but they do not amount to a completed surrender of lease unless they clearly express termination and redelivery of vacant possession in accordance with the lease and the Transfer of Property Act. Mere intimation of an intention to quit, without handing over keys or otherwise restoring possession, does not discharge the lessee's obligation to put the lessor back in possession. Rent liability continues until vacant possession is actually delivered or lawfully surrendered; on the facts noted, liability continued until the keys were deposited in court, and arrears were recoverable for the intervening period.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the tenant's letters to the landlord amounted to valid determination or surrender of the lease. (ii) Whether the tenant remained liable to pay rent until vacant possession was actually handed over to the landlord.

Issue (i): Whether the tenant's letters to the landlord amounted to valid determination or surrender of the lease.

Analysis: The lease could be terminated by notice, and an intention to quit could amount to determination of the lease. However, the communications written by the tenant did not clearly state that the lease stood terminated in the sense of an express surrender of possession, nor did they fix a date and time for delivery of vacant possession. The tenant continued to retain fixtures, fittings and occupation, and therefore did not complete the surrender contemplated by the lease and the Transfer of Property Act.

Conclusion: The letters could operate as notice of termination, but they did not amount to a completed surrender of the lease with delivery of vacant possession.

Issue (ii): Whether the tenant remained liable to pay rent until vacant possession was actually handed over to the landlord.

Analysis: Under the lease deed and the Transfer of Property Act, the lessee was bound on determination of the lease to put the lessor in possession. Mere intimation of unwillingness to continue in the premises did not discharge that obligation. The tenant remained in effective possession until the keys were deposited in court, and could not avoid rent merely because of third-party litigation or a unilateral decision to stop using the premises. A tenant's liability continues until possession is redelivered to the landlord or otherwise lawfully surrendered.

Conclusion: The tenant remained liable to pay rent until 15 April 2010, when the keys were deposited in court.

Final Conclusion: The impugned judgment was set aside and the landlord's suit for arrears of rent was decreed for the period during which the tenant continued to retain the premises without effectively surrendering vacant possession.

Ratio Decidendi: A tenant who merely communicates an intention to discontinue the lease but does not clearly surrender and redeliver vacant possession remains liable for rent until possession is actually handed over in accordance with the lease and the Transfer of Property Act.

---