Samiraj v. Ayisha Manju

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.08.2018 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN C.R.P.(MD)No.1172 of 2018 and C.M.P.(MD).4979 of 2018 Samiraj .. Petitioner/1st Respondent / 1st Respondent vs.

1. Ayisha Manju

2. Imran

3. Minor Fathima .. Respondents 1 to 3/ Petitioners/ Petitioners (Minor 3rd respondent represented through her mother and natural guardian 1st respondent) 4.P.Rajini .. 4th Respondent/ 2nd Respondent / 2nd Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal order dated 23.04.2018 passed in I.A.No.32 of 2018 in R.C.O.P.No.59 of 2015 on the file of the Rent Controller/Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruchirappalli.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For Respondents 1 to 3 : No appearance

ORDER

The revision petitioner is the first respondent in R.C.O.P.No.59 of 2016 on the file of the learned Rent Controller, Trichy. The specific case of the land lady is that the tenant has sub-let the premises in favour of one Rajini. He was also shown as the second respondent. The so called sub-tenant filed a memo stating that he was not called Rajini but Rajinikanth.

2. Hence, the landlady took out an interlocutory application for amending the said RCOP. The said I.A.No.32 of 2018 was allowed on 23.04.2018. The correctness of the said order is questioned in this civil revision petition.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that a mere look and the details of the amendment application would go to show that the landlady wanted to introduce quite a few other matters. He therefore wanted this Court to set aside the impugned order.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. This Court carefully considered the said argument and also the materials on record. It is seen that the landlady merely wants to add some more information with regard to the ground subletting. It does not alter the character of the proceedings. In any event, the Rent Controller found that it fit to allow the amendment application. It is a discretionary order. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in this civil revision petition. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I) To The Rent Controller / Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirappalli.

+1cc to Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai, Advocate Sr.No.79527 PJL VB/RSK/SAR1/20.09.2018/2P/3C C.R.P.(MD)No.1172 of 2018 20.08.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/