Madras High Court
Ramesh vs N. Thahir Ahmed Sahib on 14 November, 2025
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on 20.08.2025
Pronounced on 14.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
C.R.P. Nos. 1606 and 1607 of 2021
Ramesh ...Petitioner in both CRPs
Vs.
N. Thahir Ahmed Sahib ... Respondent in C.R.P. No.1606/2021
E. Tamil Thendral ... Respondent in C.R.P. No.1607/2021
Prayer in C.R.P. No.1606 of 2021: Civil Revision Petition filed under
Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18
of 1960 as amended by Act 23 of 1973 against the judgment and decree
dated 05.03.2021 passed in R.C.A. No.2 of 2018 on the file of the
Subordinate Court, Vaniyambadi, Vellore District, confirming the order
and decreetal order dated 10.04.2017 passed in R.C.O.P. No.31 of 2015,
on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Vaniyambadi.
Prayer in C.R.P. No.1607 of 2021: Civil Revision Petition filed under
Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18
of 1960 as amended by Act 23 of 1973 against the judgment and decree
dated 05.03.2021 passed in R.C.A. No.5 of 2018 on the file of the
Subordinate Court, Vaniyambadi, Vellore District, in reversing the order
and decreetal order dated 05.07.2018 passed in R.C.O.P. No.26 of 2015,
on the file of the District Munsif Court, Vaniyambadi.
Page 1 of 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
For Appellant : Mr. K. Umar in both the petitions
For Respondent : Mr.PA. Sudesh Kumar
in both the petitions
COMMON ORDER
Challenging the judgment and decree dated 05.03.2021 passed in
R.C.A No. 2 of 2018 confirming the order and decreetal order dated
10.04.2017 passed in R.C.O.P. No.31 of 2015 and, R.C.A. No. 5 of 2018
reversing the order and decreetal order dated 05.07.2018 passed in
R.C.O.P. No.26 of 2015, on the file of the Subordinate Court,
Vaniyambadi, Vellore District, the present Civil Revision Petitions are
preferred.
2. R.C.O.P. No. 31 of 2015 was filed by the petitioner/tenant herein
against the respondent in C.R.P. No.1606 of 2021 seeking permission to
deposit the monthly rent of Rs.250/- before the Sub Court Vaniyambadi.
R.C.O.P. No.26 of 2015 was filed by one E.Tamil Thendral / respondent
in C.R.P. No.1607 of 2021 against the petitioner herein for eviction.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
3. The case of the petitioner/tenant, namely Ramesh, in RCOP
No.31 of 2015 is that he is a tenant under the respondent namely
N.Thahir Ahmed Sahib with the petition mentioned property since
11.06.2003. The father in law of the petitioner was tenant under the
respondent since 1983. He got the electric connection and also running
a saw mill. The petitioner has paid an advance amount to the tune of
6,20,000/- on various dates to the respondent between 2009 and 2014.
Initially the petitioner paid a monthly rent of Rs.50/- and the same was
enhanced to Rs.250/- in the year 2009 and the same was paid regularly.
On 10.06.2015, the respondent demanded a further advance amount of
Rs.5,00,000/- from the petitioner which was refused by him. Hence, the
petitioner was threatened by the respondent to evict him from the shop
premises. Hence, the petitioner was constrained to file a suit in O.S.
No.113 of 2015 against the respondent for the grant of permanent
injunction. On 18.09.2015, the petitioner sent a legal notice to the
respondent calling upon him to furnish his bank details in order to
deposit the monthly rent and the said legal notice was returned to the
petitioner as "left without instruction". The petitioner has sent the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
September month's rent of Rs.250/- through money order on 23.10.2015.
But the respondent refused to receive the money order and the same has
been returned. Hence he was constrained to file the present petition
seeking permission to deposit the monthly rent of Rs.250/- before this
Court.
3.1. The respondent filed a written statement stating that the
petition mentioned property along with the cement sheet building
originally belonged to him and his wife. One Shanmugam, the father in
law of the petitioner was his close friend and he was the tenant under the
respondent. After his death, the petitioner continued the saw mill
business as tenant of the respondent. The respondent sold the petition
mentioned property to one E.Tamil Thendral through a registered sale
deed dated 15.07.2015 and also handed over the possession to her and
the same was intimated to the petitioner and his tenancy was terminated
with effect from 30.07.2015. From 01.08.2015 onwards, the petitioner is
a tenant under the said E.Tamil Thendral. Hence, the respondent refused
to receive the money order. Hence, prayed to dismiss the present petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
3.2 After full contest, RCOP No.31/2015 filed by the
petitioner/tenant herein was dismissed by the Rent Control Authority
vide its order dated 10.04.2017 against which an appeal was filed in
R.C.A. No.2 of 2018 by the petitioner and the same was also dismissed
vide judgment and decree dated 05.03.2021.
4. The case of the petitioner, namely E. Tamil Thendral, in RCOP
No.26 of 2015 is that the originally the petition mentioned property
belonged to one M. Tahir Ahmed Sahib and his wife. The respondent
namely Ramesh was a tenant under the said Tahir Ahmed. On
15.07.2015, the petitioner purchased the said property from the above
landlord and the respondent was informed about the said sale on the
same day itself and the tenancy in respect of the petition mentioned
property between the respondent and the said Tahir Ahmed was
terminated with effect from 30.07.2015. From 01.08.2015 onwards the
respondent is a tenant under the petitioner on a monthly rent of
Rs.4,000/-. The respondent did not pay any amount towards advance and
failed to pay the monthly rent for the month of August and September
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
2015 in spite of several demands. The petitioner further submits that the
petition mentioned property is required for her own use. The
respondent, without the consent of the petitioner, demolished the wall on
the eastern side of the petition mentioned property and made construction
also. The respondent already filed a suit against the petitioner and Thahir
Ahmed before the District Munsif Court, Vaniyambadi, in
O.S.No.113/2015 for the relief of injunction. Since the respondent failed
to pay the rental arrears and also failed to vacate the petition mentioned
property, the petitioner was constrained to file the present petition.
4.1. In the counter statement filed by the respondent it is stated that
the respondent has paid huge advance amount to the original owner Tahir
Ahmed and his wife and also spent money for the construction of the
structure in the petition mentioned property and hence the original owner
cannot create any document of transfer in favour of the petitioner. In
order to avoid the repayment of advance amount and the construction
cost, the said Tahir Ahmed colluded with the present petitioner in filing
the present petition. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
4.2. RCOP No.26/2015 filed by E.Tamil Thendral against
G.Ramesh for eviction was dismissed by the Rent Control Authority vide
its order and decreetal order dated 05.07.2018 against which an appeal
was filed in R.C.A No. 5 of 2018 before the Sub Court, Vaniyambadi.
The learned Subordinate Judge, Vaniyambadi allowed the said appeal
vide his judgment dated 05.03.2021.
5. Challenging the judgment and decree dated 05.03.2021 passed
in R.C.A No. 2 of 2018 and R.C.A. No. 5 of 2018 on the file of the
Subordinate Court, Vaniyambadi, Vellore District, the present Civil
Revision Petitions are filed by the tenant G. Ramesh.
6. Heard Mr. K. Umar, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.PA. Sudesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent.
7. It is not in dispute that the petition premises originally belonged
to one Thahir Ahmed Sahib and his wife Ashraffunisa Begum under
whom the petitioner in RCOP No.31/2015 was inducted as a tenant. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
said original petition was filed by the petitioner/tenant under Section 8(5)
of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, for
depositing the rents into Court. According to the petitioner/tenant, the
respondent Thahir Ahmed refused to receive the rents, he was
constrained to file above petition.
7.1. On the other hand, the contention of the respondent Thahir
Ahmed is that he had sold the suit property to one Tamil Thendral under
a registered sale deed dated 15.07.2015 and the same was informed to the
petitioner/tenant. The further contention of the respondent is that the
tenancy agreement between himself and the tenant was terminated with
effect from 30.07.2015 and the same was also informed to the tenant. In
spite of that, the petitioner/tenant has moved the above Original Petition
which is liable to be dismissed.
7.2. The learned subordinate judge, Vaniyambadi, in RCA
No.2/2018 and 5/2018 has observed that the Revision petitioner after
receiving the communication under Ex.A1 notice about the purchase of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
the petition mentioned property by the respondent Tamil Thendral, failed
to pay the monthly rents to him and concluded that the revision
petitioner / tenant is not entitled to seek the remedy of depositing the
monthly rents under Section 8(5) Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent
Control) Act, 1960, and that he is liable to be evicted from the petition
premises for committing willful default. It is not in dispute that Ex.A1
and Ex.A5 legal notices were sent by the erstwhile landlord namely,
Thahir Ahmed Sahib, stating that he had sold the property to respondent
Tamil Thendral under the sale deed dated 15.07.2015 and thereby
directing the revision petitioner to pay the rents to the new landlord by
terminating his tenancy with the revision petitioner from 30.07.2015.
Even after receipt of the said notice, the revision petitioner failed to pay
the rents to the respondent Tamil Thendral. On the other hand, the
revision petitioner has filed a petition to deposit the rent before the Rent
Controller. He had neither paid the rent to the respondent Tamil Thendral
nor deposited the same. When a tenant files a petition to deposit rent
while disputing the new owner's title in bad faith, the new owner /
landlord has strong legal grounds to challenge the tenant's actions and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
pursue eviction. The law generally prohibits a tenant who entered the
premises through a rental agreement from later challenging the landlord's
title, especially in bad faith. Only when the new owner refuses to accept
rent, a tenant can file a petition to deposit the rent into Court. But, in the
present case, in spite of notice of execution of sale deed in favour of
Tamil Thendral, the petitioner/tenant failed to recognize him as his
landlord and pay the rent to him. In fact, in O.S.No.137 of 2015, the
petitioner/tenant has questioned the validity of the sale deed dated
15.07.2015 executed by the erstwhile owner in favour of Tamil Thendral.
It shows that the petitioner/tenant has deliberately decided not to accept
the new owner as landlord and pay the rent to him. Once a tenant
disputes or disclaims the landlord's ownership, the tenancy relationship
comes to an end, and constructive possession is deemed to have ceased.
Such denial of title amounts to forfeiture of tenancy rights, making
eviction inevitable. The new owner also filed RCOP No.26/2015 for
eviction on two grounds, namely, under willful default and for own use
and occupation. Hence, the Rent Control Appellate Authority rightly
held that the revision petitioner has willfully defaulted in payment of rent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
and that he is liable to be evicted. No perversity or infirmity is found in
the above findings of the Rent Control Appellate Authority which
warrants any interference by this court.
8. In the result,
i. Both the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No costs.
ii. The judgments and decrees, dated 05.03.2021, passed in R.C.A
No. 2 of 2018 and R.C.A. No. 5 of 2018 respectively on the file of
the Subordinate Court, Vaniyambadi, Vellore District, are upheld.
14.11.2025
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-Speaking order
bga
To
1. The Subordinate Judge, Vaniyambadi, Vellore District.
2. The Additional District Munsif, Vaniyambadi.
3. The District Munsif, Vaniyambadi.
4. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
C.R.P. Nos.1606 & 1607 of 2021
K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI,J
bga
Pre delivery common order in
C.R.P. Nos. 1606 and 1607 of 2021
14.11.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/11/2025 05:25:34 pm )
