Madras High Court
Mrs. Fathima Gani vs M.Kalnther Naina Mohamed on 15 April, 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15.04.2021
Coram
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
C.R.P. (PD) No. 597 of 2021
And
C.M.P.No. 5137 of 2021
1. Mrs. Fathima Gani
2. Mrs. Sarah Bivi
... Petitioners/Petitioners/Appellants/Tenants
-Vs-
1. M.Kalnther Naina Mohamed
2. M.Mohamed Jabarullah
... Respondents/Respondents/Respondents/Landlord
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25(1) of the
Tamilnadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, against the docket
order passed in above M.P.No. 01 of 2020 in R.C.A.No. 134 of 2020 passed
by the learned VIII Small Causes Court, Chennai, (Rent Control Appellate
Authority) dated 23.12.2020 by directing the petitioners to pay the rental
arrears to an extent of Rs.1,00,035/- on or before 24.01.2021 and
consequential order dated 25.01.2021 by vacating the interim order of stay
against the further proceedings in R.C.O.P.No. 1350 of 2013 on the file of
learned XII Small Causes Court, Chennai (Rent Controller).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
2
For Petitioner : Mr. R. Anish Kumar
For Respondent : Mr. R.Veeramani
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed questioning the order in
M.P.No. 1 of 2020 in R.C.A.No. 134 of 2020 which is pending on the file of
the VIII Small Causes Court, Rent Control Appellate Authority at Chennai.
2. The said Rent Control Appeal had been filed questioning the
order in R.C.O.P.No. 1350 of 2015 passed by the learned XII Small Causes
Court, Chennai [Rent Controller]. The petitioner had suffered an order of
eviction before the learned Rent Controller and also a conditional order was
passed by the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority. The petitioner had
not complied with the said conditional order.
3. It is informed that possession had also been taken through the
Bailif. However the said fact had not been recorded by the learned Rent
Controller. The learned Rent Control Appellate Authority, by order dated
23.12.2020 had observed that the Rent Controller had held that the appellant
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
therein had committed wilful default in the payment of rent. The landlord
had been claiming rents from August 2011 @ Rs. 3,200/- p.m., which
amounted to Rs.4,25,600/-. The rent had been paid up to September 2018
and the present petitioner was liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,035/- upto
December 2020. A direction was granted to pay the said amount to the
landlord on or before 24.01.2021 or to deposit such amount into the Court.
Admittedly, the said condition had not been complied with. Thereafter, a
further order had been passed on 25.01.2021 in an application seeking
extension of time to comply with the conditional order in M.P.No. 2 of
2021. That application was dismissed.
4. As a matter of fact, it was observed that an adjournment
petition had been filed without the signature of the party. The learned
counsel for the appellant stated that he was not able to file an affidavit and
petition for extension of time.
5. Procedures as stipulated by law will have to be complied with.
If the present petitioner is not prepared to file an affidavit seeking extension
of time, there is no obligation also on the Rent Control Appellate Authority
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
or on the Rent Controller to grant any liberty to the petitioner. The
petitioner cannot claim ignorance, plead innocence and seek indulgence of
the Court. It is clear that he is a chronic defaulter in the payment of rent and
naturally observing that the default was huge in quantum, an order of
eviction had been passed.
6. The Rent Control Appellate Authority had given a life line to
the petitioner by directing him to deposit the arrears of rent. Even that had
not been complied with. The only contention raised by the learned counsel
for the petitioner is that there is no landlord / tenant relationship. This is not
an issue which can be examined or even determined or even be advanced
before this Court. That is an issue which has been settled during trial. It has
been adjudged that the petitioner is a tenant. It has been adjudged that the
petitioner is in default in payment of rent. It has been further adjudged that
the default is willful. It has been therefore adjudged that the petitioner
should vacate the premises and hand over possession.
7. I am informed that the respondent had taken possession
through Court. The Bailif had submitted a report to the Court. The Rent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Controller is under an obligation to record the said report of the bailif. The
Rent Controller should record delivery of Judgment if it had been taken in
manner known to law.
8. With the said directions, this Civil Revision Petition is
dismissed. No order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petition is closed.
15.04.2021
vsg
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No.
Speaking / Non speaking
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
vsg
C.R.P. (PD) No. 597 of 2021
And
C.M.P.No. 5137 of 2021
15.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
