Madras High Court
Siraj Beevi vs Kathiresan on 9 April, 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
C.R.P.(NPD).2996 of 2019
and
C.M.P.No.19332 of 2019
1.Siraj Beevi
2.Amitha Banu
3.Gouse Banu
4.Noor Nisha
5.Dhaulath Nisha
6.Bhargath Nisha
7.Hira Fathima ... Petitioners
Vs.
Balasubramaniyam Chittiar (Dead)
1.Kathiresan
Adham Baasha (Dead)
2.Jenni Bee
3.Faritha
4.Shamina ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/7
2
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, to allow the above C.R.P. by setting aside the Fair Order and Decreetal
Order dated 18th day of June 2019 passed in E.A.No.4 of 2019 in E.P.No.28 of
2015 in R.C.O.P.No.6 of 2008 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum
Rent Controller, Tiruvallur.
For Petitioners : Mr.J.R.K.Bhavanantham
For Respondents : Mr.A.Palaniappan
*****
ORDER
The civil revision petition has been filed by questioning the order in
E.A.No.4 of 2019 in E.P.No.28 of 2015 which execution petition is pending on
the file of the District Munsif cum Rent Controller, Thiruvallur. Originally,
R.C.O.P.No.6 of 2008 had been filed seeking eviction against Adham Basha.
Adham Basha had a brother, Anvar Basha. Both the families were residing
together in the tenanted premises.
2. Adham Basha contested the Rent Control Petition. Thereafter,
eviction was ordered.
3. He filed a Rent Control Appeal. That was dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
4. Later, the landlord filed E.P.No.28 of 2015. Pending the E.P., he
died. His legal representatives had been brought on record. To put the order of
eviction into force, the Court took necessary steps. The bailiff visited the
property to take possession, at that time, the present petitioners obstructed.
They are none other than the family members of Anvar Basha, the brother of
Adham Basha. They claim that they are total strangers and that they are not
aware of the Rent Control Proceedings or the Rent Control Appellate
Proceedings and the Execution Proceedings.
5. I am not able to understand how such a contention can even be
thought to be put forth in a Court of law. Notices are served to the address in
which the tenants reside. Each and every individual family member need not be
put on notice. That would be stretching the issue of notice a little too far.
6. Even otherwise, in the counter in the Rent Control Petition, it
should have been mentioned that Adham Basha is not a tenant and that Anvar
Basha alone is a tenant. That stand had also not been taken.
7. The parties went to trial on the basis that Adham Basha was a
tenant and he contested the Rent Control Petition. He also filed Rent Control
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Appeal questioning the order of eviction. The rest of his family members will
have to abide any orders passed by the Court though it may be against Adham
Basha. All the persons residing in the tenanted portion are bound by any order
passed by Court, since the order of eviction is to vacate the premises and hand
over vacant and peaceful possession of the premises.
8. Individual family members cannot disclaim knowledge. They
cannot claim ignorance of judicial proceedings. They cannot seek indulgence
on that particular ground. The obstruction made by the present petitioners to
grant of delivery of possession is not at all bona fide. Order 21 Rule 97 CPC is
a provision to be put into effect by the decree holder when there is an
obstruction at the time of delivery of possession.
9. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that
when the bailiff visited the premises, the present petitioners showed various
documents including ration card and subsequent documents to show that they
are in possession and it is their grievance that the bailiff did not record those
documents but rather only recorded obstruction to taking of delivery.
10. I am not able to again understand that particular contention. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
bailiff does not have the authority to record document to note down documents
and accept documents. If encouraged, a situation may very well occur that a
Bailiff may also form an opinion regarding as to against whom an order of
eviction has to be passed.
11. The bailiff is only an Officer of the Court appointed to take
possession of the property pursuant to the orders of the Court. He cannot be
expected to discharge the functions of the Court. If at all the petitioners have
documents they have to file the same before the Court. Documents have to be
examined and either accepted or rejected by the learned Rent Controller.
12. The learned Rent Controller has very specifically found that the
residential address of the present petitioners are one and the same as that of
original judgment debtor in the R.C.O.P., R.C.A., and E.P., proceedings. It had
also been stated that service of summons to the respondents in the R.C.O.P.,
was duly effected to the present address of the schedule mentioned property. It
had also been stated that the address has not changed from the institution of the
R.C.O.P. till the date of delivery order in the Execution Petitions. Therefore, it
was concluded by the learned Rent Controller that the contention that they have
no knowledge of the Rent Control Proceedings, no knowledge of the Rent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Control Appellate Proceedings and no knowledge of the Execution Petition
cannot be accepted. It had also been stated that the claim that they had
knowledge only at the time of Eviction Proceedings also cannot be accepted.
When specific findings of facts have been given, there is no reason to hold a
different view from what the learned Rent Controller has stated. The order is
perfectly correct. The reasons are upheld.
13. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. The Execution Petition
now pending before the District Munsif Court cum Rent Control, Thiruvallur in
E.P.No.28 of 2015 shall proceed in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
09.04.2021
bri
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
To
The District Munsif cum Rent Controller,
Tiruvallur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
bri
C.R.P.(NPD).2996 of 2019
and C.M.P.No.19332 of 2019
09.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
