Madras High Court

V.Ganesh vs S.Balaji on 29 April, 2025

Author: P.T.Asha

Bench: P.T. Asha

                                                                                         CRP No. 1891 of 2025



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 29-04-2025

                                                           CORAM

                                    THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

                                                CRP No. 1891 of 2025
                                              and CMP No.10892 of 2025

                V.Ganesh
                Ganesh Institute of Maths and Accountancy,
                NO.29, Nainappa Naicken Street, Chintadripet,
                Chennai-600002 Residential Address at B/3, II Floor,
                Ceebros Lotus Apartments, 31/40, Montieth Road,
                Egmore, Chennai-600008.

                                                                                               Petitioner(s)

                                                                Vs

                S.Balaji
                S/o. Late A.Subramanian,
                No.16, Nainappa Naicken Street, Chintadripet,
                Chennai-600002

                                                                                            Respondent(s)

                          Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India

                to set aside the order dated 25.03.2025 passed in M.P.No.1 of 2025 in

                R.L.T.O.P.No.512 of 2024 on the file of the XIV Small Causes Court, Chennai.


                                  For Petitioner(s): Mr.Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam, Senior Counsel
                                                     for M/s.Vijayalakshmi K.Rajaratnam



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )
                                                                                           CRP No. 1891 of 2025



                                                             ORDER

The above civil revision petition is filed by the petitioner/tenant

challenging the order dated 25.03.2025 passed in M.P.No.1 of 2025 filed for

dismissing R.L.T.O.P.No.512 of 2024 as not maintainable, on the ground that

the Small Causes Court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the R.L.T.O.P.

2. The brief facts are as follows:

2.1 The petitioner and the respondent hereinafter will be referred to as

the tenant and landlord, respectively.

2.2 The landlord has filed the above R.L.T.O.P.No.512 of 2024

seeking to evict the tenant on the ground that there was no tenancy agreement as

contemplated under Section 21(2)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights

and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (for brevity “the Act”).

2.3 It is the contention of the landlord that the tenant had approached

him and requested him to let out his premises on rental basis and accepting the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )

said request, a tenancy agreement dated 30.07.2004 was entered into between

them, in and by which, an advance of Rs.50,000/- was paid and the monthly rent

was fixed at Rs.4,000/-. The tenancy agreement was initially for a period of

eleven months commencing from 01.08.2004 to 30.06.2005. Thereafter, it was

only on the insistence of the landlord that the tenancy agreement was being

renewed. The last of the renewal was on 29.10.2012 and thereafter, despite the

request of the landlord for renewing the tenancy, the tenant had not come

forward to do so. The landlord would submit that in 2010, the advance was

increased to a sum of Rs.75,000/- and from the year 2006 the tenant had been

using the premises as tuition centre in the name of “Ganesh Institute of Maths

and Accountancy”.

2.4 It is the further contention of the landlord that the last rental

amount received was a sum of Rs.17,250/- for the month of April 2024 by way

of an antedated cheque. Thereafter, from May 2024, the tenant has been in

default. Not only has the tenant committed default in payment of rent, but, he

had also altered the premises without the consent of the landlord, in and by

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )

which, he had demolished the kitchen room of the premises and converted the

same for tuition purpose, thereby, converting a residential premises into a non-

residential one. In the meanwhile, the Act came into force in the year 2017 and

under the said Act, registration of the rental agreement was mandatory. Since

the tenant had not come forward to register the tenancy agreement despite the

landlord's request, this proceeding had been initiated by the landlord.

2.5 The tenant on entering appearance in the above matter, had come

forward to file an application in M.P.No.1 of 2025 for dismissing the

proceedings as not maintainable. The grounds, on which, the said petition had

been filed, read as follows:

(a) the tenancy agreement was being renewed between the landlord and the

tenant from the month of August 2019 through various WhatsApp

messages, which have been extracted in the petition, on the basis of

which, the rent was increased from a sum of Rs.12,000/- to Rs.15,000/-

and later, to a sum of Rs.17,250/- from April 2023.

(b) the landlord and the tenant had a mutual discussion and had come to the

understanding that from the month of November 2019, the rent would be

payable at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )

into subsequent to the commencement of the Act or if any tenancy

premises is let or allowed to be continued as a tenant with new terms and

conditions and the Act would apply only in case, where the tenancy

agreement is as per Sections 4(1) and 4(3) of the Act.

(d) The rental agreement between the landlord and the tenant is in effect to

date.

2.6 The landlord had filed a counter affidavit stating that after

29.10.2012, the rental agreement has not been renewed and the WhatsApp

messages were sent calling upon the tenant to renew the agreement, to which,

the tenant had not agreed. The tenant was also in default of the rents apart from

converting the premises without the consent of the landlord. Since the rental

agreement had come to an end and the new Act came into force, the petition

filed by the landlord was very much maintainable.

2.7 The learned XIV Small Causes Judge, Chennai, by order dated

25.02.2025 was pleased to dismiss the petition in M.P.No.1 of 2025, challenging

the same, the tenant is before this Court.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )

3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the tenant

would draw the attention of this Court to the judgment of this Court in

C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.3056 of 2021, etc., where, the learned Judge was considering

a batch of cases, where, even at the stage of numbering the petitions, the same

have been rejected on the ground that there is an absence of tenancy agreement,

which is mandatory for the purpose of invoking the jurisdiction of the Rent

Court under the new Act. It is the further contention of the learned Senior

Counsel that after considering the various petitions, the learned Judge had

classified the issue into six different types of cases, which are as follows:

i. Written tenancy created prior to and expired prior to the commencement

of the Act (Tenant holding over under an oral tenancy);

ii. Oral tenancies created prior to the New Act and no written agreement

entered into;

iii. Written tenancies created prior to the New Act and the period expired

after the commencement of the Act;

iv. Written tenancies entered after the commencement of the New Act not

registered by subsisting;

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )

v. Written tenancies created after the commencement of the New Act and

had presently expired (either registered or unregistered); and

vi. Oral tenancies created after the New Act.

4. The learned Senior Counsel would rely upon the observations of

the learned Judge in various paragraphs, where, the learned Judge has observed

that in the case of the first three classes of cases, where, tenancies had been

entered into prior to commencement of the Act and the provisions of Sub-

Section 2 of Section 4 of the Act has not been complied with by the landlord or

the tenant, then the landlord is at liberty to seek eviction under Section 21(2)(a)

of the Act. The learned Judge has further observed that as regards the fourth

class of cases viz. written subsisting tenancies entered into after the

commencement of the Act, but, not registered, the landlord can seek eviction

only under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Further, the learned Judge

observed that the fifth category relates to agreements, which had been entered

into after the commencement of the Act and had expired at the time of

presentation of the eviction petition and here again, there may be two kinds of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )

agreements viz. a registered tenancy agreement or an unregistered agreement.

With reference to the fifth category, the learned Judge has observed three

contingencies, which are as follows:

i. The landlord demanding possession at the end of the tenancy and the tenant refusing to vacate;

ii. The landlord demanding possession within the period of six months during which the tenancy is deemed to continue; and

iii. There is no demand by the landlord even after the expiry of the six months period.

With reference to the first and third contingencies, the learned Judge has

observed that the landlord can only invoke the General Law and sue for eviction

after terminating the tenancy. With reference to the second contingency, the

learned has observed that it is well open to landlord to invoke the provisions of

Section 21(2) except of course Clause (a) of Sub-Section 2 of Section 21 of the

Act. It is further observed by the learned Judge that in the case of sixth

contingency, where, there is no written agreement of tenancy either registered or

unregistered, the landlord can only seek remedy under the Transfer of Property

Act, 1882.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )

5. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that the petitioner's/tenant's

case will fall in the fifth category and therefore, it is only a suit for eviction that

can be filed.

6. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

petitioner/tenant and perused the records.

7. In order to appreciate the submissions, it would be appropriate to

extract the Section 4(2) and its proviso and also Section 21(2)(a) of the Act,

which reads as follows:

4.Tenancy Agreement.-

(2) Where, in relation to a tenancy created before the commencement of this Act, no agreement in writing was entered into, the landlord and the tenant shall enter into an agreement in writing with regard to that tenancy within a period of [five hundred and seventy five days] from the date of commencement of this Act:

Provided that where the landlord or tenant, fails to enter into an agreement under this sub-section, the landlord or tenant shall have the right to apply for termination of the tenancy under clause (a) of sub- section (2) of Section 21.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 03:11:54 pm )

21.Repossession of the premises by the landlord.-

(2) The Rent Court may, on an application made to it in the manner as may be prescribed, made an order for the recovery of possession of the premises on one or more of the following grounds, namely:-