M/S. Sr Marine Foods Private Limited v. J. Chandrasekaran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :11.04.2022
CORAM:
Mr. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE C.R.P(PD)Nos.1090 and 913 of 2022 & C.M.P.Nos.5586 and 4638 of 2022 1.M/s. SR.Marine Foods Private Limited Represented by its Managing Director Mr. Sushil Kanugolu Having Registered Office at:
No.2A Door No AC5, 2nd Floor, 2nd Avenue Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040.
2.Kangolu Venkata Ramana Chairman and Director of M/s.SR.Marine Foods Private Limited Having office at No.2A Door No AC5, 2nd Floor, 2nd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040.
3.Sushil Kanugolu Managing Director and CEO of M/s.SR Marine Foods Private Limited Having Office at No.2A Door No AC5, 2nd Floor, 2nd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040.
...Petitioners in both CRP
Vs.
J.Chandrasekaran
...Respondent in both CRP
COMMON PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India,to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 17.12.2021 made in M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2021 in RLTOP Nos.384 and 383 of 2020 on the file of the XI Small Cause Court, Chennai. For Petitioners :
Mr.N.V.Prakash COMMON ORDER Both C.R.P.No.1090 of 2022 and C.R.P.No.913 of 2022 arise between the same parties in two different RLTOPs which involve an identical question. C.R.P.No.913 of 2022 is not listed today, but by consent of the parties it was taken and heard.
2.These Revisions are filed by the tenant in RLTOP.Nos.383 and 384 of 2020 against the orders passed in M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2021, by which, he has sought for striking off certain aspect of the pleadings of the respondent / landlord.
3.The situation arises in the following way: The landlord has laid the aforesaid RLTOPs for eviction, and he relies on certain lease deeds. These lease deeds were not allowed to be marked during the enquiry by the Rent
Court on the ground that it was not sufficiently stamped under the Stamp Act. Now, the tenant has come forward with M.P.No.1 and 2 of 2021 for striking down the pleadings of the landlord wherever he has referred to the aforesaid lease agreements. The Rent Court dismissed them on the ground that the pleadings are different from proof and hence the decision of the Rent Court not to admit the lease agreements between the landlord and tenant need not necessarily lead to striking of pleadings of the petitioner based on the said rent. This Court does not find any illegality or irregularity. 4.In the result, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed at the admission stage itself. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed. No costs.
11.04.2022 Index : Yes/No kas To The XI Small Causes Court Chennai.
N.SESHASAYEE, J., kas C.R.P(PD)Nos.1090&913/2022 & C.M.P.Nos.5586&4638/2022 11.04.2022