JUDGMENT :

P. RAJAMANICKAM, J.

1. This second appeal has been filed by the defendant against the judgment and decree passed by the Sub-Court, Poonamallee in A.S. No. 6 of 2011 dated 12.12.2002 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Munsif, Poonamallee in O.S. No. 148 of 2005 dated 29.11.2010.

2. The respondent herein had filed a suit in O.S. No. 148 of 2005 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Poonamallee, for recovery of arrears of rent of Rs. 1260/- and for mandatory injunction to direct the defendant to remove the multi-storied building which has been unauthorisedly constructed by her in the suit property. The learned Additional District Munsif, Poonamallee by the Judgment dated 29.11.2010 had decreed the said suit directing the defendant to handover the suit property to the plaintiff. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant had filed an appeal in A.S. No. 6 of 2011 on the file of the Sub-Judge, Poonamallee. The learned Sub-Judge, Poonamallee by the judgment dated 12.12.2012 had partly set aside the judgment and decree passed by this trial court and dismissed the suit in so far as the prayer (a) is concerned and into far as the prayer (b) is concerned, she has granted mandatory injunction as prayed for. She granted three months time for removal of unauthorised construction. Feeling aggrieved, the defendant has filed the present second appeal.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as described before the trial court.

4. The averments made in the plaint are in brief, as follows:

The suit property absolutely belonged to the plaintiff. It is used for residential purpose. The defendant became a tenant under the plaintiff in or about 1985 on a monthly rent of Rs. 35/-. The tenancy is an oral one for residential purpose according to the English Calendar month. The defendant is irregular in payment of monthly rent from the date of inception. The defendant had wantonly failed to pay the ground rent at the rate of Rs. 35/- per month from January, 2002 till January, 2005 amounting to Rs. 35 x 36 = 1260/- inspite of number of oral demands made by the plaintiff. Apart from committing willful default in payment of rents, the defendant had put up a pucca storied building in the suit site without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff and sub-let it to the third parties with a view to enrich herself by squatting on the suit property. The defendant had violated the terms of the oral lease, nonpayment of ground rent, by way of putting up storied building and sub-letting the same. When the plaintiff has questioned about the construction of the defendant, she has not replied properly. Hence, the plaintiff was constrained to file the above suit for recovery of arrears of rent and for mandatory injunction to remove the storied building which has been unauthorisedly constructed without the consent of the plaintiff in the suit property.

5. The averments made in the written statement are in brief, as follows:

The defendant became a tenant on 01.05.1994 and not in the year 1985 as alleged in the plaint. The monthly rent is Rs. 35/-. In the schedule of property, the description of the property has not been properly given. The defendant never put up any building as alleged. The defendant purchased the building from one S. Rajabather who purchased the same from one Nithyanandam, who was a tenant of the plaintiff in respect of the ground. There is a registered sale-deed in favour of S. Rajabather in respect of the suit property in the year 1989. The plaintiff very well aware of the facts. The defendant only altered and not put up any new construction or any multi-storied buildings as alleged in the plaint. On the contrary, she only altered the building which was already in existence. The plaintiff has not issued any notice before filing the suit. Hence, there is no violation of oral lease. Even before filing of the suit, the defendant had sent a sum of Rs. 840/- being arrears of rent for the period