With the consent of the learned counsel on either side, the second appeal is taken up for final disposal. When the second appeal was admitted, the following substantial questions of law were framed:

1. When the Court has found that the proceedings initiated by the respondent for fixing of fair rent for suit property and the order in the said proceedings has not become final and actually a C.R.P. No. 2377 of 1996 was pending in this Honble Court at the time when the respondent filed the suit O.S. No. 79 of 1989, whether the conclusion of the Court below that the suit is maintainable in the light of the decision reported in 1996 2 Law Weekly 849, is sustainable in law?

2. Whether the conclusions of the Court below rejecting the additional evidence and the suit is barred by limitation and Balasubramaniam is not necessary party are correct in the facts and circumstances of the case?

3. It is not in dispute that there is a landlord-tenant relationship between the parties to the suit. The plaintiff is the landlord and the defendant is the tenant. The tenancy is covered by the Tamil Nadu Rent Control Act. Fair rent for the building in question was fixed by the Rent Controller, ex