The fair rent fixed by the lower courts was upheld based on the evidence presented, and non-examination of parties to the sale deeds was not necessary when there was no question of the genuineness of the sale deeds.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 25 of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, against the judgment and decree dated 17.03.2021 made in R.C.A. No.205 of 2019 on the file of the VIII Small Causes Court, Chennai, confirming the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2019 passed in R.C.O.P. No.370 of 2014 on the file of the XII Small Causes Court, Chennai.

Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 25 of Tamil Nadu .Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, against the fair and decreetal order dated 17.03.2021 made in R.C.A. No.189 of 2019 on the file of the VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, confirming the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2019 made in R.C.O.P. No.370 of 2014 on the file of the XII Small Causes Court, Chennai.)

1. C.R.P. Nos.1087 & 1255 of 2021 are filed against the judgments passed by the learned Judge, VIII Small Causes Court, Chennai in R.C.A. Nos.205 & 189 of 2019, respectively, confirming the judgment passed by the Judge, XII Small Causes Court in R.C.O.P. No.370 of 2014. 2. The tenant is the petitioner in C.R.P. (NPD) No.1087 of 2021 and the landlord is the petitioner in C.R.P.(NPD) No.1255 of 2021. The landlord filed R.C.O.P. No.370 of 2021 under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, for fixing fair rent. The landlord is the owner of the premises bearing old door No.37-B/2, new door No.128/2, West Mambalam, Chennai. He owns nine shops in ground floor and eight shops in first floor. The tenant had taken the premises for lease for non-residential purpose. The tenant is running a departmental store from the year 1991. The tenant occupies shop bearing Nos. 'E' & 'F' and pays a monthly rent of Rs.1,450/- for each shop and totally a sum of Rs.2,900/- for both the shops. The petition premises is located in a commercial locality having surrounded by banks like State Bank of India, Indian Overseas bank, H.D.F.C. Bank, I.C.I.C.I Bank, Chennai Cooperative Bank, Karnataka bank, Indian Bank, Bank of Inida, Sri Sitaram Vidyalaya Matriculation Higher School, Railway station, Ayodha Mandapam, Marriage Halls and other business establishments. The portion in tenant's occupation in shop No. 'E' and 'F' measures 284 sq.ft. in addition to 65 sq.ft. cantilevered slab projecting outside the shop. The land value in the locality is more than Rs.3,00,00,000/-. The fair rent was fixed at Rs.28,303/- per month. Therefore, the present petition is filed for fixing fair rent.

3. The tenant filed a counter admitting the tenancy and also the payment of rent Rs.1,450/- per shop and totally a sum of Rs.2,900/- per month as rent. Originally the rent was fixed at Rs.525/- and it was enhanced from time to time. The petition premises measures 280 sq.ft. in shop 'E' and 140 sq.ft in shop 'F'. There is no other facility except the shop. The ground floor was constructed in the year 1953 and first floor was constructed subsequently. The building is more than 60 years old. Basic amenities like electricity connection, common water supply in the toilet and drainage connection are available. Front slab area is about 30 sq.ft is common for all. The market value of the land is about Rs.60,00,000/- per ground. Based upon the prevailing rate, the fair rent would be Rs.5,164/- per month. The value claimed by the landlord that the ground value is Rs.3,00,00,000/-, is not based on the guideline value. But it is a open market value. The claim of fair rent at Rs.28,303/- is highly excessive.

4. In the enquiry before the learned Rent Controller, P.W.1 and P.W.2 and R.W.1 were examined and Exs.P1 to P7 and Exs.R1 to R7 were marked. Thus, we have the Engineer's report and the plan filed by both the parties and sample sale deeds filed by both the parties along with the analysis report of the Engineers to assist the Court.

5. On going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Rent Controller found that the nature of the building according to the landlords' Engineer is