Madras High CourtCRP(MD)/362/2018allowed

P.K.Muhabathbeevi, v. A.Narayanan

2018-10-01Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.10.2018

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN C.R.P.(PD) (MD) No.362 of 2018 and C.M.P.(MD) No.1632 of 2018 P.K.MuhabathBeevi ... Revision Petitioner/Respondent/ Respondent/Respondent-Tenant -VsA.Narayanan ..Respondent/Respondent/ Petitioner/Petitioner-Landlord Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 21.03.2017 passed in I.A.No.16 of 2017 in I.A.No.49 of 2016 in R.C.O.P.No.35 of 2014 on the file of the 1st Additional Rent Controller Court (1st Additional District Munsif Court), Tirunelveli.

For Petitioner:

Mr.M.P.Senthil

O R D E R

The tenant is the revision petitioner.

The respondent/landlord filed R.C.O.P.No.35 of 2014 on the file of the Rent Controller/1st Additiona District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli for evicting the revision petitioner on the ground of demolition and re-construction. In the said R.C.O.P, the landlord filed an application under Sections 11(1)(3) & (4) of Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act and the amended Act 23 of 1973 and 1/1980. The court below allowed the said Interlocutory Application on 14.12.2016 directing the tenant to deposit the arrears on or before 20.01.2017. The revision petitioner did not comply with the said direction, instead, I.A.No.16 of 2017 was taken out on 30.12.2017 seeking extension of time. Such Interlocutory Application was dismissed on 21.03.2017. After dismissal of I.A.No.16 of 2017, it appears that eviction order was passed in the main R.C.O.P. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would contend that the order dismissing I.A.No.16 of 2017 has been questioned in this Civil Revision Petition.

2. When the matter was taken up for admission on 26.02.2018, a condition was imposed by this Court that the revision petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.49,940/-. The learned counsel would https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

submit that the said condition has since been complied with. He also submitted that as against the order allowing the R.C.O.P, he filed an appeal before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, but, with delay condonation petition. It appears that the said delay condonation petition has been dismissed and against the same, he has filed another Civil Revision Petition before this Court.

3. It is true that even the order impugned in this Civil Revision Petition is appealable, but then, this Court has chosen to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India and also put the revision petition on terms. Since the revision petitiioner complied with the condition imposed by this Court while granting interim order, taking note of the conduct of the revision petitioner and the reasons set out in the affidavit filed in support of I.A.NO.16 of 2017 and the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner that the eviction order was not passed before dismissal of I.A.No.16 of 2017, this Court is inclined to set aside the order impugned in this Civil Revision Petition as prayed for. The tenant shall deposit the remaining rental arrears within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected C.M.P.(MD) No.1632 of 2018 is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I) To, The 1st Additional Rent Controller Court (1st Additional District Munsif Court), Tirunelveli.

+1 CC To MR.M.P.SENTHIL, Advocate SR. NO. 88179 C.R.P.(PD) (MD) No.362 of 2018 and C.M.P.(MD) No.1632 of 2018 01.10.2018 CM TR/SKN/SAR-I(04.10.2018)2P 3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/