The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the character of the trust as a public or private trust and the maintainability of the petition for fair rent under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960.

1. The instant Civil Revision Petition is filed as against the Judgment and Decree passed in R.C.A. No. 1 of 2006 on the file of the Learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore. reversing the Judgment and Decree passed in R.C.O.P. No. 45 of 1987 on the file of the Learned Rent Controller, Vellore.

2. The issue involved in filing of the R.C.O.P was to fix fair rent, a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the property in Door No.4/3 Officer’s Line, Vellore Town, North Arcot District.

3. Before parting with the factual and legal aspects of instant case this court has recorded its deep concern about the length of the legal Proceedings to get justice in Rent Control Matters. The available records show that the R.C.O.P., was filed in the year 1987 and before this court CRP is filed in the year of 2011 and after the lapse of nearly about 6 years, the court get the opportunity to give its verdict finally. By this observation this court has held that the parties and their Counsels must be fair enough to all extent for the earliest disposal of the cases concerned, in order to inspire confidence upon the litigants then only the people and the litigants would have more faith upon the legal parameter and the present justice delivery system.

4. Now, let this Court enters in to the issue involve in the instant case. Admittedly, the Trustee of Sri. Thirunavukarasu Swamigal Madam, Vellore, filed the aforesaid Rent Control Original Petition for the fixation of fair rent as against the Respondent. The prayer sought for is to fix the fair rent for the petition property a sum Rs.5,000/- per month or as per the market value of the property. In the said proceedings, the 2nd Respondent filed counter and refuted all the averments of the petition inter alia, Further, it is contented by the 2nd Respondent there in that the claim of Rs.5,000/- as fair rent is very high. Further, the 2nd respondent also filed additional counter by questioning the jurisdiction of the Rent Control Tribunal by disputing the character of the Trust as Public Trust and thereby the Rent Control Act cannot have application at all.

5. The learned Rent Controller after considering the totally of the case concluded that as the petitioner did not prove the character of the trust, the fair rent cannot be fixed. Feeling aggrieved over the Judgment and Decree passed in R.C.O.P. No. 45 of 1987, the Petitioner/Land lard filed an Appeal in R.C.A. No. 1 of 2006. Here also after full-fledged proceedings, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the Appeal by set-aside the Judgment and Decree passed in R.C.O.P. No. 45 of 1987. The Appellate Tribunal directed the Respondent/Tenant to pay the monthly rent from the date of filing of the R.C.O.P. No. 45 of 1987.

6. Aggrieved over the Judgment and Decree passed in R.C.A. No. 1/2006 Dated 08.07.2005 the instant Criminal Revision is preferred.

7. The learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner has contended that the Appellate authority is erred in holding that the petition Trust is a Private Trust. Further, without considered the oral and documentary evidence the Learned Appellate Authority concluded that the Petition Property is a private trust property. Moreover, he also contended that the fixation of the value of the property as Rs.200/- per square feet is wrong. As for as the Judgment and Decree passed in the R.C.A. No. 1 of 2006 is concerned, it was passed without considered the facts and circumstances of the cases. So he prays that the Civil Revision Petition is to be allowed. To support his arguments, he has relied on the following citations:

(i) In the case of Narayana Guruviah Chetty’s Estate and Charities by its Trustees P.Manavala Chetty and others Vs. K.V. Venkateswaran and another :

At the time when these two ejectment suits were filed (Ejt. S.Nos.76 and 78 of 1976), even private trusts were exempted from the purview of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. But, pending the suits the particular Government order, was amended extending the privilege only