Jayanthiammal v. S.Dhanasekar2.D.SankarRaj

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 27.07.2007CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAMCRP.NPD.NO.1107 OF 2006ANDCMP.NO.1 of 2006Jayanthiammal ....PetitionerVs.1.S.Dhanasekar2.D.SankarRaj .... RespondentsThis Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 25of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960against the fair and decretal order dated 28.3.2006 made inRCA.No.2 of 2005 on the file of learned Rent Control AppellateAuthority-cum-Principal Sub Judge, Krishnagiri reversing thefair and decretal order dated 29.7.2005 made in RCOP.No.8 of2002 on the file of learned Rent Controller-cum-District Munsif,Krishnagiri.For petitioner: Mrs.S.Agalyafor Mr.K.NagarajanFor Respondents: Ms.Poornima---- O R D E RChallenge is made to the order of eviction passed bythe Rent Control Appellate Authority, Krishnagiri made inRCA.No.2 of 2005 whereby the Rent Control Appellate Authorityreversed the order of the Rent Controller rejecting the requestfor eviction in RCOP.No.8 of 2002 .2. The respondent/landlord filed a petition foreviction of the revision petitioner/tenant alleging that theproperty in question belonged to the landlord's family, that theproperty was originally leased out to one Velayudham Pillai, thehusband of the petitioner/tenant in the year 1952 on the monthlyrent of Rs.17/- and it was gradually raised from Rs.17/- toRs.125/- during the relevant period and despite oral demands,there was rental arrears from Februray 2000 to January 2003 andthus it was wilful default. The tenant has made some alterations https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ which would detriment the value of the building and no writtenconsent was received for the same from the landlord. Theproperty was also sub-let to other parties. Hence on thosegrounds, the eviction must be ordered.3. The petition was resisted by the petitioner/tenantstating that rent was regularly paid and endorsement was usedto be made in a pocket note-book and the rent was paid tillJune, 2002 and from July 2002, the landlord refused to receivethe rent . Under such circumstance, a petition in OP.No.1 of2003 was filed by the tenant for the purpose of depositingrental arrears and the respondent has also filed a petition inM.P.No.6 of 2003 for recovery of rental for the period of eightmonths. Since OP. has been filed and it has been allowed, themonthly arrears have been deposited. Under such circumstances,there was no default much less wilful default by thepetitioner/tenant. The petitioner/tenant is living with herfamily members and they are not the sub-tenants and AdvocateCommissioner was appointed has made an inspection and found thatno alternations were made and only there was wooden partitionand thus all the grounds raised by the landlord have to berejected. On enquiry the Rent Controller, not convincing withthe case of the landlord,has dismissed the Rent ControlPetition. Aggrieved landlords took it on appeal, the RentControl Appellate Authority after looking into the materialsavailable on record, has passed an order of eviction on theground found in the application. Aggrieved tenant has broughtforth this Civil Revision petition. 4. In support of the revision petition, learnedcounsel for the petitioner/tenant reiterated the contentions putforth before the forum below and would further request that theorder of the rent Controller may be restored and the order ofthe Rent Conrol Appellate Authority may be set aside.5. Heard the learned counsel for the respondent on theabove contentions.6. Concededly, the revision petitioner herein is thetenant under the landlord on the monthly rent of Rs.125/- duringthe relevant period. According to the specific case of thelandlord before the lower Court that there was rental arrearsfrom February, 2000 to January 2003. On the contrary, the caseof the petitioner/tenant was that the rents have been paid tillJune, 2002 regularly and the landlord used to make endorsementin a pocket note-book about the payment of rental, that the saidnote book was actually handed over to one Sali Boy who is theagent of the landlord and he did not return the said book.Taking advantage of the situation, a case was filed stating thatrental arrears stands from February 2000 to January 2003 and nonotice was issued for the said default, before filing the RCOP.All would go to show that there was no default much less wilful https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ default. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner wouldsubmit that the tenant being a old lady is living with herdaughters and Sons-in-law,. Hence, at no stretch of imaginationthe question of sub letting would arise. There cannot be anyalteration of the building or detrimental to the value of thebuilding. Hence,the Rent Controller dismissed the petition, butit was erroneously set aside by the appellate authority. Hence,the order of the appellate forum must be set aside.7. After considering the rival submissions made, thisCourt is of the considered opinion that Civil Revision Petitiondoes not carry merit whatsoever. Inso far as the ground of subletting is concerned, this Court is unable to see any ground inthe contentions of the landlord. Admittedly, the tenant isliving with his daughters and Sons-in-law. Under the saidcircumstances, it cannot be stated to be sub letting and so faras other ground of alteration of the building is concerned, evenas per evidence, it could be seen that the old landlady isliving with his family members, therefore it cannot bedetrimental to the value of the building. These two grounds havebeen rightly rejected by the Rent Controller. But,in so far aswilful default is concerned, this Court is of the consideredopinion that the landlord has a good case. Admittedly, evenaccording to the landlord, there was rental arrears fromFebruary 2000 to January, 2003. According to the tenant, renthas been paid till June 2002 and from July 2002 to January,2003,there was arrears of rent for a period of eight months. At thisjuncture, it is an admitted position that they maintained apocket note book in which the endorsement has been made by thelandlord which is kept by the tenant/revision petitioner.According to the revision petitioner, the payment of rents tillJune, 2002 was paid with proper endorsement, but it was handedover to one Sali Boy. According to the revision petitioner, theSali Boy who is the agent of the landlord and the case of thepetitioner/tenant is that after it was given to the said SaliBay, it was never returned. Therefore, taking advantage of thesituation, the respondent/landlord came with a false case. Hadit been true the said Sali Boy who is the agent of the landlordhas not returned the said book, immediately the tenant shouldhave given a notice for the return of the said book, but he hasnot done so. Even in this case, he has not paid the rent foreight months continuously from July 2002 till RCOP was filedinstead, he has filed O.P.1 of 2003 for depositing the rentalarrears which would clearly indicate that that period has got tobe considered as wilful and the Rent Control Appellate Authoritywas perfectly correct in ordering eviction and hence the orderof the appellate authority on the ground of wilful default issustained. 8. Taking into consideration the fact that the tenantis actually residing with his family members and for shiftinghis residence to some other place, reasonable time has got to be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ given. This Court is of the considered opinion that nine monthstime from the date of receipt of a copy of this order has to begiven to the petitioner/tenant to vacate and hand overpossession to the respondents/landlord. The revisionpetitioner/tenant is directed to file an undertaking affidavitto that effect within a period of two weeks from today. 9. The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. Nocosts. Consequently, MP.No.1of 2006 is closed.VJYSd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrarTo1. The Principal Sub Judge,Rent Control Appellate AuthorityKrishnagiri.2. The Rent Controller,District Munsif, Krishnagiri3. The Section Officer,VR Section, High Court,Madras.+ 1 cc to Mr. V. Raghavachari, Advocate, SR No.47003+ 1 cc to Ms. S. Agalya, Advocate, SR No.46662KK(CO)SR/17.8.2007CRP.NPD.NO.1107 OF 2006ANDM.P.NO.1 OF 2007