E-Paper
Bengaluru landlord deducts ₹60,000 for repainting: Are tenants bound to pay a month’s rent on moving out?
Bengaluru rental market: A tenant has questioned whether landlords can deduct an entire month’s rent from the security deposit for repainting after tenancy ends
A Bengaluru tenant has questioned on Reddit whether a landlord can deduct an entire month’s rent, ₹60,000, from the security deposit towards repainting and maintenance after the tenancy has ended. The tenant questioned whether repainting after two years of occupancy constitutes normal wear and tear or warrants such a deduction from the deposit.
“I've been staying in a rented 3BHK for the past two years, paying ₹60k rent per month. I'm moving out now, and the owner is saying he'll deduct one month's rent from my deposit for repainting and other such work,” the tenant posted on Reddit.
“Is this actually fair?
I understand if there is any damage caused by me, that should be deducted. But regular wear and tear is bound to happen after living in a house for two years. Isn't maintaining that the owner's responsibility? And even if some repainting or minor work is required, how does that automatically become ₹60k? Is one month's rent deduction a normal practice when moving out?” he asked.
The post prompted a debate, with Redditors divided over where the responsibility for maintenance should lie.
Have the conversation with the landlord before moving in, rather than when moving out
Several Redditors pointed out that the answer may lie in the rental agreement. One user said tenants should check the terms agreed upon at the time of moving in, particularly clauses requiring the property to be handed back in the same condition in which it was received.
‘Cheapest option’, according to one Redditor, could be for the tenant to get the house painted themselves, after discussing the specifications with the landlord, and then claim the full security deposit back.
Another Redditor advised tenants to have the conversation before moving in rather than when moving out.
According to the user, tenants should clarify at the beginning of the tenancy whether the property will be repainted when they vacate, whether normal wear and tear will be treated separately from actual damage, and whether they can undertake painting or repairs themselves before handing over the property.
Wear and tear vs damage
Not everyone agreed that repainting should automatically be treated as normal wear and tear.
One Redditor argued that scribbled walls, drilled holes and curry stains cannot be classified as ordinary wear and tear. Another pointed out that tenants may sometimes become less careful about maintaining a rented property because they expect the landlord to bear the eventual cost.
At the same time, the Reddit discussion also highlighted that landlords can have legitimate costs when a tenant leaves. Broken wardrobe doors, damaged fixtures or repairs resulting directly from the tenant’s use may reasonably be charged to the tenant, users argued.
Some Redditors drew a distinction between fixtures such as fans, lights and plumbing, which they said should generally fall under the landlord’s maintenance responsibilities, and painting, which can be more contentious.
What if the house wasn't freshly painted when you moved in?
This was one of the strongest counterpoints raised in the discussion.
One tenant said they had moved into a house that was already dirty and had not been freshly painted. They cleaned it themselves, but the landlord still deducted money for painting and maintenance when they eventually moved out.
Another user shared a similar experience, saying that despite staying in a property for only a year and not receiving a freshly painted home at the beginning, the landlord deducted ₹65,000 towards painting.
Is one month’s rent a standard painting charge?
Some Redditors described the practice of deducting one month’s rent as common in Bengaluru. Others called it unfair, particularly when the deduction is made as a blanket charge without establishing the actual cost of repairs or painting.
The discussion also touched on another concern: if landlords are expected to bear all repainting costs between tenants, those expenses could eventually be factored into rents.
For tenants, however, the key issue is transparency. A fixed deduction of ₹60,000 does not necessarily mean that ₹60,000 worth of work was actually carried out, a Redditor wrote.
Lessons for tenants
The consensus from several commenters was that painting and maintenance should be discussed at the beginning of the tenancy, not when the tenant is preparing to leave.
Before paying a token or signing a rental agreement, tenants could clarify:
Who pays for repainting at the end of the tenancy?
What qualifies as normal wear and tear?
Which types of damage can be deducted from the deposit?
Can the tenant carry out painting or repairs independently?
Is there a fixed deduction, or will the actual cost be calculated?
What condition is the property expected to be in when it is handed back?
The Bengaluru debate ultimately highlights a larger issue in India's rental market: security deposits are often significant sums, but the rules governing deductions are not always equally clear to landlords and tenants. A detailed rental agreement, photographs of the property at move-in and move-out, and clarity on maintenance responsibilities can go a long way towards avoiding a dispute, say experts.
Many landlords in Bengaluru said the deduction is meant to restore the property before handing it to the next tenant. They argue that repainting costs have increased in recent years due to higher labour costs and rising material prices, making a one-month rent adjustment a practical benchmark.
Legal experts note that such deductions are generally governed by the rental agreement signed between both parties. Avilash Naik, an advocate practising at the Karnataka High Court, said there is no blanket prohibition on these charges. According to him, if the agreement specifically mentions repainting or restoration deductions and both the landlord and the tenant have accepted the terms, the clause may be enforceable, subject to the facts of the case.
(Disclaimer: This report is based on user-generated content from social media. HT.com has not independently verified the claims and does not endorse them.)
