Madras High Court
C.Babu vs J.Bhanumathy on 27 October, 2021
C.R.P.No.3573 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.10.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
C.R.P.(PD).No.3573 of 2019
and
C.M.P.Nos.1080 & 23413 of 2019
C.Babu .. Petitioner
Versus
1.J.Bhanumathy
2.Jayashreebhaskar .. Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
India, praying to set aside the fair and docket order dated 16.09.2019 made in
MP.No.44 of 2019 in RCOP. No.921 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judge
No.XV, Small Causes, Chennai.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Viswanathan
For Respondents : Mr.K.Harikrishnan
ORDER
The petitioner herein is the tenant in RCOP.No.921 of 2018, filed
by the respondent for eviction on the ground of willful default. In that
Page No.1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.No.3573 of 2019
RCOP.No.921 of 2018, the landlord filed an application in M.P.No.44 of 2019
under Section 11(4) for recovery of rent arrears. The said application was
contested by the tenant and the same was also allowed by the learned XV
Judge, Small Causes, Chennai. Aggrieved by the said order, the tenant has
preferred this revision petition.
2. Heard Mr.S.Viswanathan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.
K.Harikrishnan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.
3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner / tenant submitted
that, based upon a wrong calculation, M.P.No.44 of 2019 was allowed on
16.09.2019. The learned trial Judge failed to note the disputed arrears of rent.
Without considering the disputed arrears of rent, the petition was allowed.
Hence he challenged the said order.
4. By way of reply, the learned counsel for the landlord / respondent
submitted that there was a typographical error in the decree / Judgment of the
Trial Court and the same was rectified. Further he also submitted that, after
Page No.2/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.No.3573 of 2019
deduction of the advance amount, the tenant was directed to pay the arrears of
rent, which comes to nearly Rs.6,56,000/-. Since the tenant failed to pay the
arrears of rent, M.P.No.44 of 2019 was allowed by the learned XV Assistant
Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner / tenant also admits
that at the time of admission the learned trial Judge, directed the revision
petitioner / tenant to pay the rental arrears from July 2017 to August 2019,
which comes to 26 months, however it has been wrongly mentioned as 38
months.
6. On 05.11.2019, based upon that, interim stay was granted. But as on
date, the revision petitioner, neither complied with the said order nor paid the
arrears of rent, either by deposit before this Court or to the RCOP Account.
7. On considering the conduct of the tenant, this Court finds that he is
abusing the process of the Court by filing this application. I do not find any
merit in this application and the order passed by the learned XV, Assistant
Page No.3/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.No.3573 of 2019
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
rri
Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai in M.P.No.44 of 2019 in RCOP. No.921
of 2018 is confirmed. The tenant is directed to vacate the premises within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. Consequently
connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
27.10.2021
Index : Yes / No
Speaking Order:Yes/No
rri
To
1.The Judge No.XV,
Small Causes Court,
Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
C.R.P.(PD).No.3573 of 2019
and C.M.P.Nos.1080 & 23413 of 2019
Page No.4/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
