S.Arunkumar vs M.Nazee Ahmed [Died
2022 Latest Caselaw 7049 Mad

                                                                                 CRP.No.2360 of 2015

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 05.04.2022

                                                        CORAM

                                   THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU

                                      Civil Revision Petition [NPD] No.2360 of 2015
                                    & M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2015 & CMP.No.20312 of 2019

                     S.Arunkumar                                              ... Petitioner


                                                            ..Vs..

                     1. M.Nazee Ahmed [died]
                     2. Yasmeen Nigar
                     3. N.Muthuhar Ahmed
                     4. N.Aafreen Salma
                        [R2 to 4 brought on record as LRs of the deceased
                        R1 vide Order dated 21.12.2021in CMP.Nos.17443
                        to 17445 of 2019 in CRP.No.2360 of 2015 by VMVJ] ... Respondents

                     Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under section 25[1] of
                     Tamil Nadu Buildings [Lease and Rent Control] Act against the judgment
                     and decree dated 22.08.2014 made in RCA.No.186 of 2012 on the file of the
                     IX Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai confirming the fair and decreetal
                     Order dated 09.12.2011 made in RCOP.No.318 of 2010 on the file of the
                     XIV Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.


                     1/10



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                         CRP.No.2360 of 2015



                                        For petitioner     : Mr.R.Bharathikumar

                                        For respondents    : Mr.G.Ilangovan


                                                           ORDER

Aggrieved against the decree and judgment dated 22.08.2014 made in

RCA.No.186 of 2012 on the file of the IX Judge, Small Causes Court,

Chennai confirming the fair and decreetal Order dated 09.12.2011 made in

RCOP.No.318 of 2010 on the file of the XIV Judge, Small Causes Court,

Chennai, the petitioner has preferred the present Civil Revision Petition.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred as per their

ranking before the trial Court.

3. The case of the petitioner therein before the Court below is that he

has let out the petition mentioned property to the respondent's father one

Mr.K.Sankar for non residential purpose. After the death of the

respondent's father, the respondent is continuing the business of his father

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.2360 of 2015

and hence, he is treated as a tenant with respect to the petition premises.

The rent of the premises is Rs.1200/- and the respondent continued to pay

the rent after the death of his father and as the rent was paid by way of

cheque, there arose no requirement for issuance of receipts. Inspite of

repeated requests and demand made by the petitioner, the respondent failed

to pay the rents from September 2009 to November 2009. The respondent

issued a cheque dated 19.10.2009 for a sum of Rs.2000/- towards part

payment of rental arrears, but the same was dishonoured for want of

sufficient funds. Further, the earlier cheque issued by the respondent

towards rent was also dishonoured. Hence, the petitioner issued a legal

notice dated 12.12.2009 calling upon the respondents to pay the arrears of

rent. But the respondent has not sent any reply or paid the arrears or cleared

the cheque amount of Rs.2000/-. It is contended that the respondent is

taking advantage of the sickness and old age of the father of the petitioner

and adopting strategies which are not permissible under law. Therefore, the

default committed by the respondent in payment of monthly rent is

deliberate, wilful and wanton and therefore, he filed a petition in

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.2360 of 2015

RCOP.No.318 of 2010 against the respondent who is liable to deliver the

vacant possession of the demised premises.

4. Admitting the tenancy and the quantum of rent paid, the

contention of the respondent therein in the counter submitted before the trial

Court is that the petitioner never issued receipts for the rent paid by his

father by way of cash. It is his further contention that the petitioner asked

for a loan of Rs.2000/- to pay the water charges and assured to adjust the

same in the rent. But when the cheque was deposited, the same has been

returned for want of sufficient funds. The respondent has paid the cheque

amount, but failed to take back the cheque. The respondent has not received

any legal notice dated 12.12.2009. The petitioner used to come to the

petition premises and collect the rents during the lifetime of his father. But

after the death of his father, the petitioner who was residing in the adjacent

portion has shifted his resident and did not furnish his new address. Only

after filing of the RCOP, the respondent came to know about the petitioner's

address and thereafter, he had sent three money orders for a sum of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.2360 of 2015

Rs.12,800/- and the same was received by the petitioner. Further, the

respondent has obtained the service connection in his father's name and is

paying the charges directly. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Before the trial Court, on the side of the petitioner, petitioner was

examined as P.W.1 and exhibits Ex.P.1 & Ex.P.2 were marked. On the side

of the respondent, respondent was examined as R.W.1 and exhibits Ex.R1 to

Ex.R.4 were marked. On considering the evidence and documents, the

learned Rent Controller has ordered eviction vide Order dated 09.12.2011 in

RCOP.No.318 of 2010 as against which the tenant/respondent filed an

appeal in RCA.No.186 of 2012 before the IX Judge, Small Cases Court,

Chennai. The lower appellate Court confirmed the eviction Order passed by

the Rent Controller. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision

Petition has been filed.

6. The main contention of the petitioner herein is that the fair and

decreetal Order of the Courts below are against the law, contrary to the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.2360 of 2015

evidence available on record and suffers from material irregularities and if

the same is allowed to stand, it would occasion a failure of justice. The

Courts below have failed to consider the non payment of monthly rent from

September 2009 to November 2009 is not wilful and it occurred only due to

shifting of the residential premises by the landlord without any intimation to

the petitioner. Therefore, non payment of rent in the present case cannot be

termed as wilful default and it is only unintentional default and the same can

be condoned. The Courts below have failed to consider that the cheque was

issued by the petitioner to the respondent as a hand loan to clear the water

charges and not relating to any alleged arrears of rent. Admittedly, the

respondent retained the rental advance of Rs.5000/- with him and if at all

any arrears of rent accrued that can be adjusted, he is entitled to retain only

one month rent as advance. Therefore, the petitioner has not committed any

default, much less wilful default in payment of the monthly rent. The Rent

Control Authorities have failed to apply the law relating to wilful default in

the proper prospective while ordering eviction and had ordered eviction on

mere conjectures and surmises.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.2360 of 2015

7. In support of his contentions, the counsel for the petitioner has

filed the rental receipts from the year 2010 to 2020 and the Bank Statement

of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner has not committed any

default in payment of rent. Therefore, the reasons assigned by the Courts

below in ordering eviction are not sustainable, legal and sound and are liable

to be set aside. Hence, prayed to allow this revision.

8. The learned counsel for the respondent would state that the

petitioner committed wilful default in payment of rent and even after filing of

this Civil Revision Petition, the petitioner committed default in payment of

rent and the respondents have also filed statement of rent details paid by the

petitioner to prove the wilful default committed by the petitioner. Hence,

submitted that well reasoned Orders of the Courts below need no

interference and prayed for dismissal of this petition.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.2360 of 2015

9. Heard the learned Counsel for both sides and perused the materials

placed before this Court.

10. The trial Court and the first appellate Court while ordering

eviction, had considered the entire materials available on record and held

that the act of the petitioner is wilful and intentional. The previous and

subsequent conduct of the petitioner proves his malafide intention to

continue in the possession without paying rent and the same is clearly

proved by the respondents through evidence. During the pendency of this

revision, though the petitioner has filed additional documents stating that he

has not committed any wilful default, the rental receipts filed by the

petitioner and the statement of rent details filed by the respondents would go

to show that there is wilful default committed by the petitioner. Hence, the

Courts below have appreciated the evidence and documents in the right

perspective and Ordered eviction which do not warrant any interference of

this Court.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.2360 of 2015

11. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

05.04.2022

Index:yes/no Internet:yes

vrc

To

1. The IX Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai

2. The XIV Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.2360 of 2015

J.NISHA BANU, J.

vrc

Civil Revision Petition [NPD] No.2360 of 2015

05.04.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis