The authority of the power agent, as the 'landlord' for the purpose of the Act, and the petitioner's estoppel from challenging the maintainability of the proceedings at the fag end of the trial.

1. This civil revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 20.8.2008 in RCA No.675 of 2007 on the file of VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai confirming the order dated 7. 2007 in M.P.No.170 of 2007 in RCOP No.1004 of 2006 on the file of XIV Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

2. The petitioner is a tenant in respect of a non-residential building situated at Door No.13 First Cross Street, United India Colony, Kodambakkam, Chennai-24. The said property was in the ownership of one T.S.M.Haja Mohideen and it was taken assignment by the landlord Mrs.Sunitha as per sale deed dated 112. 2005. The petitioner was informed of the change of ownership and he attorned the said tenancy and he has been paying rent to the landlady.

Initiation of Proceedings:

3. While the matter stood thus, the respondent/landlady through her power agent filed a petition under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 before the XIV Small Causes Court, Chennai directing the petitioner to pay fair and reasonable rent at the rate of Rs.8,565/-per month. The petition was filed on the basis of a power of attorney executed by the landlady in favour of Mrs.P.Suguna.

Defence:-

4. The Rent Control Original Proceedings was contested by the revision petitioner by filing counter statement. According to the petitioner there was no justification in enhancing the rent to Rs.8565/- per month and he has been paying the market rent at Rs.1,100/- per month. In short, it was the contention of the petitioner that the respondent was not entitled for fixing the reasonable rent at the rate claimed by her.

5. Before the commencement of trial, the respondent marked the power of attorney as Ex.P.3. When the matter was posted for trial, the petitioner filed an application in M.P.No.170 of 2007 to reject the Rent Control Original Petition on the ground that the power agent was not entitled to institute the proceedings.

Contents of Petition:-

6. In the affidavit filed in support of the application in M.P.No.170 of 2007, it was contended that the power of attorney produced and marked as Ex.P.3 does not contain the power to initiate Rent Control proceedings and it was only a power given for availing loan from financial institutions and to operate the bank accounts. There was no express authority given to the power agent for initiating Eviction proceedings and as such the application filed at the instance of the power agent was not maintainable.

Counter:-

7. The application was resisted by the respondent. In the counter filed by the power agent, it was contended that as per the general power of attorney issued in her favour, she was entitled to maintain the proceedings before the Rent Control Court. By way of an alternative submission, it was the contention of the respondent that the petitioner having participated in the proceedings, it was not open to him to turn round and allege that she was not competent to initiate proceedings.

Decision:-

8. The learned trial Judge on a consideration of the general Power of Attorney ,was of the opinion that it was open to the respondent to conduct Rent Control Proceedings on the strength of the General Power of Attorney and it was always possible for the landlady to ratify the action taken by her agent and dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai. However the said appeal was also dismissed confirming the order passed by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Appellate Court, the unsuccessful tenant is before this Court.

Arguments:-

9. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that though the power of attorney was described as a General power of attorney there was no authorisation given to the power agent to initiate proceedings for eviction. It was a power of attorney authorising the power agent to open bank accounts and to receive money on her behalf and for purchase of immovable prop