Balasubrahmanyan. J.- This civil revision petition comes before us on a reference by Mohan, J., who heard it, in the first instance, without finally deciding it. The revision petition raises an important and controversial question of law as to the effect of a notification issued on 12th August 1974 by the Tamil Nadu Government, under which buildings owned by Hindu, Christian and Muslim Religious Trusts and Charitable Institutions were exempted from all the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. In the instant case, eviction proceedings instituted under the Act against the tenant of a building owned by a Hindu Religious institution were pending before the Rent Controller on the date when the exemption was notified. The controversy between the parties was whether, on the issuance of the Government’s notification, the eviction petition then pending before the Rent Controller abated or whether he had jurisdiction to proceed with the inquiry and dispose of the eniction petition on merits. Mohan, J., on hearing arguments was inclined, prima facie, to take the view that with the issue of the notification by the Government, the jurisdiction of the Rent Controller even in the pending proceedings was taken away. The learned Judge, however, noticed that a contrary view had been expressed earlier by Gokulakrishnan, J. in another case, C.R. P.No. 3336 of 1975 disposed of on 9th July 1976. In the circumstances, the learned Judge referred the civil revision petition for being heard by a Division Bench. This is how the matter has come before us.

2. Before proceeding to enter upon the question in controversy, we may briefly set out the background facts. Sengalaneer Pillayar Temple, Koranad, Mayuram owns a few shop buildings, lying to the west of the temple. One of such shop buildings was let out by the temple to one Manickam Chettiar, originally on a rent of Rs. 15 per month and later at Rs. 30 per month. In 1971, the tenant fell in arrears of payment of the rent. By that time, the temple also bona fide required additional accommodation for housing its office and madapalli. The temple, accordingly, gave notice to the tenant for vacating the building. The tenant, however, refused to do so, claiming that he had constructed the superstructure of the shop on his own. Thereupon, the temple represented by its trustee, filed a petition RCOP No. 24 of 1973 before the Court of the Rent Controller (Principal District Munsif), Mayuram, for eviction of the tenant under section 16 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, on the ground that the tenant had committed wilful default in the payment of rent as well as on the ground that the temple required the building bona fide for its own occupation. Another ground raised in the eviction petition was that the tenant had wilfully denied the title of the temple to the superstructure. The eviction petition was filed sometime in February 1973. The tenant entered appearance before the Rent Controller and resisted the petition on various grounds. The Rent Controller, after enquiry, passed an order of eviction on 7th October, 1974. In the meantime, on 12th August. 1974, the Government of Tamil Nadu, had issued a notification under section 29 of the Act exempting all buildings owned by Hindu, Christian and Muslim religious trusts and charitable institutions from all the provisions of the Act. While so, against the order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller, as aforesaid, the tenant appealed to the appellate authority, namely, the Subordinate Judge, Mayuram, in C.M.A. No. 1 of 1975 under section 23 of the Act. In the memorandum of appeal the tenant challenged the order of eviction on merits, raising various grounds of law and fact. At the hearing of the appeal, however, the tenant put forward the contention that in view of the notification by the Government dated 12th August, 1974 exempting all buildings owned by Hindu religions trusts from the provisions o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document