S.Dilli Babu vs C.Mohan
2024 Latest Caselaw 8114 Mad

Madras High Court

S.Dilli Babu vs C.Mohan on 22 May, 2024

                                                                 1/4                         C.R.P.No.2082/2024


                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED :: 22-05-2024

                                                                CORAM

                                        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI

                                                     C.R.P.No.2082 of 2024

            S.Dilli Babu                                  ...                 Petitioner

                                                          -vs-

            1.C.Mohan
            2.C.Kumar
            3.K.Dhinakaran                                ...                 Respondents


                                  Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the Docket
            Order passed in M.P.No.1910 of 2024, dated 04.04.2024, by XI Rent Controller, in
            charge of XVI Rent Controller, Small Causes Court, Chennai.


                                        For Petitioner : Mr.S.N.Narasimhulu



                                                                ORDER

Petitioner challenges the Docket Order, dated 04.04.2024, passed in

M.P.No.1910 of 2024 in E.P.No.914/2023 in RLTOP.785/2022 by XVI Rent

Controller, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

2. Petitioner claims to be a tenant under the judgment debtor. Vide a

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

Docket Order, dated 04.04.2024, the Execution Court has dismissed a petition filed as

being not maintainable, on the ground that the petitioner claims to be a sub-tenant and

the decree of eviction against the tenant would be binding on the petitioner as well.

3. I do not find any infirmity in the above said order. Further, under the

Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants

Act,2017, Civil Procedure Code, especially the procedure under Order XXI CPC, is not

made applicable to execution proceedings under Section 39 of the said enactment.

Therefore, even from this angle, the application, seeking obstruction, is not

maintainable.

4. Mr.S.N.Narasimhulu, learned counsel for the petitioner, at this juncture,

seeks six months' time to vacate the premises.

5. Considering that the petitioner has been in occupation of the premises as

tenant right from 2015 and would contend that he has been regular in payment of rents

and not in arrears, he is granted six months' time to hand over the tenanted premises to

the respondent – landlord, from today, subject to his filing of an affidavit of undertaking,

that he shall peacefully vacate and hand over the tenanted premises to the respondent –

landlord within six months, without driving the landlord to prosecute the execution

proceedings to pay the arrears of rent, if any, and pay the admitted rent on or before 10 th

of every succeeding month, within a period of ten days.

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

6. Civil Revision Petition is dismissed accordingly. No costs.

Consequently, the connected C.M.P.No.11135 of 2024 is closed.

22-05-

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No dixit

To

XVI Rent Controller, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

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

P.B.BALAJI, J.

dixit

22-05-2024

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