High Court of Judicature at Madras
K. RAVICHANDRABAABU, J.
M. Arumugam
Versus
The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Varadharaja Perumal Koil, Panruti
C.R.P. (NPD) No.266 of 2010 & M.P. No. 1 of 2010
Decided on : 27-09-2013
Eviction - Tenant's Default in Payment of Arrears - Court directs payment of arrears in installments, but tenant fails to comply - Tenant's lack of bonafide - Dismissal of civil revision petition
Fact of the Case:
The tenant, who had defaulted in paying the lease amount to the temple, sought to set aside an eviction order. The court directed the tenant to pay the arrears in installments, but the tenant failed to comply.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the tenant had not paid the arrears as directed, showing lack of bonafide, and was only interested in restoration of possession without paying the rental arrears. The court dismissed the civil revision petition and allowed the respondent to take appropriate proceedings to restore possession of the land.
Issues: Tenant's default in payment of arrears, application to set aside eviction order, failure to comply with court's direction to pay arrears in installments, lack of bonafide
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the tenant's failure to comply with the court's direction to pay the arrears in installments showed lack of bonafide and entitlement to relief.
Final Decision: The civil revision petition was dismissed, and the respondent was allowed to take appropriate proceedings to restore possession of the land from the tenant.
1. This civil revision petition is filed challenging the order of the respondent made in E.P.No.40 of 2009 in P.T.A.No.59 of 2002 dated 13.01.2010.
2. The petitioner herein is the tenant under the respondent temple in respect of the agricultural lands. As he has defaulted in paying the periodical lease amount to the temple from the year 1998 to 2001, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for evicting him. During the course of such proceedings, the petitioner herein, on 10.11.2008, has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.74,715/-on or before 05.01.2009. Considering the said request made by the petitioner, the matter was taken up on 05.01.2009 on which date it was found that the petitioner has not deposited or paid the arrears to the respondent temple. Consequently, a notice of eviction was issued on 08.06.2009 and thereafter, an order of eviction came to be passed. The said order of eviction was sought to be set aside with a delay of 109 days in E.P.No.40/2009. The said application was rejected by the respondent by holding that the order of eviction passed against the petitioner was not an exparte order and as the petitioner was already evicted and the possession was handed over to the temple on 13.01.2010.
Challenging the same, the present civil revision petition is filed before this Court.
3. While admitting the civil revision petition, this Court by order dated 27.01.2010, directed the respondent to hand over the land on or before 05.02.2010 subject to a condition that the petitioner should pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-to the respondent being the part of the arrears of rent. It is stated that the said amount was paid and possession was also handed over to the petitioner within the time stipulated by this Court. Subsequently, the matter was listed before me on 04.07.2012. It was represented on that day that the petitioner had so far paid a sum of Rs.74,750/- to the respondent. However, the learned counsel for the respondent/temple submitted that apart from the said amount of Rs.74,750/-, the petitioner is liable to pay a further sum of Rs.1,65,000/-being the arrears of lease amount as on that date. Considering those submissions made by the respective counsels, this Court directed the petitioner to pay the said sum of Rs.1,65,000/- in three monthly installments. It was made clear in the said order that if no such payment is made by the petitioner within the time stipulated therein, the stay already granted by this Court would get automatically vacated. The petitioner was also directed to pay the periodical rent without any default. After the said order made on 04.07.2012, the matter was listed before my predecessor on 04.09.2012 and on which day, an ajournment was sought for by the petitioner by informing that the last installment payment would be made in the mean time. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to 30.10.2012. Thereafter, the matter is now listed today before me.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not paid the sum of Rs.1,65,000/- as directed by this Court in three monthly installments which period ended on 01.10.2012.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent also submitted that the conditional order imposed by this court was not complied with.
6. Heard both sides.
7. The petitioner filed this civil revision petition aggrieved against the order of the respondent in refusing to condone the delay of 109 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte order of eviction. This court while granting the interim stay has directed the respondent to restore possession and also directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-. No doubt, the petitioner has paid the said amount and got the possession restored. The possession of the land was handed over to the petitioner and thereafter when the matter was listed before this Court on 04.07.2012, it was represented on behalf of the respondent that further arrears to the tune of Rs.1,65,000/- was due from the pet
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.