J. Jaffer Ali v. C. Natarajan
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 28.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR C.R.P(MD). No.1261 of 2025 and C.M.P(MD) No.6650 of 2025 J.Jaffer Ali ... Petitioner Vs C.Natarajan ... Respondent PRAYER:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.Un numbered / 2024 in R.L.T.O.P No.34 of 2024 on the file of the III Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town (Rent Tribunal) and allow the Civil Revision Petition.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Jeyakumaran For Respondent : Mr.B.Prahalad Ravi 1/6
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order passed in I.A.No.Un numbered / 2024 in R.L.T.O.P. No.34 of 2024 on the file of the III Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town (Rent Tribunal).
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has filed an application to reject the main R.L.T.O.P.No.34 of 2024 petition and the same was dismissed by the trial Court on the ground of maintainability and the proceedings under the Rent Control Act is a summary proceedings, all issues to be decided during the enquiry and entire contention of the petitioner to be adjudicated during trial. This Court for deciding the question of maintainability under Section 21(2)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has relied upon the Judgement reported in 2022 (2) CTC 291 in S.Muruganandam Vs. J.Joseph in C.R.P.(NPD) Nos.3056, 3061, 3062, 3063, 3067 and 3094 of 2021, dated 04.02.2022 and the relevant portion is extracted hereunder:
2/6
13. From the instances that had arisen in these six revisions, the different types of cases that may arise before the Rent Court can be broadly classified 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 but subsisting; v. Written tenancies created after the commencement of the New Act and had presently expired (either registered or unregistered) vi. Oral tenancies created after the New Act.
3. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent has relied upon the very same judgment in paragraph 20 is extracted below:
20. As I have already pointed out the first three classes of cases enumerated above, do not pose any difficulty as the tenancies therein would have been entered into prior to the commencement of the Act and Sub Section 2 of Section 4 not having been complied with by the tenant or the landlord, the landlord is at liberty to seek eviction 3/6
under Section 21(2) (a) of the New Act in respect of contingencies 1 and 2 and all clauses of Sub section 2 of section 21 in respect of the 3 rd contingency, dehors the question of registration of a Tenancy Agreement.
4. This Court, after hearing the learned counsel on either side, without going into the merits of this case, the trial Court is directed to number the I.A.No.unnumbered of 2024 in R.L.T.O.P.No.34/2024 and dispose of the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and with regard to all the contentious issues, the same shall be decided within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above direction, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
Speaking : Yes / No 28.01.2026 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Indu 4/6
To 1.The III Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town (Rent Tribunal).
2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.
Indu 28.01.2026 6/6