COMMON ORDER :

Civil Revision Petition Nos.518 and 519 of 2019 have been preferred against the judgment of the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority in R.C.A. Nos.463 and 538 of 2017 respectively in R.C.O.P.No.585 of 2013 by the landlady. C.R.P.No.678 of 2019 has been filed against the judgment of the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority in R.C.A.No.463 of 2017 in R.C.O.P.No.585 of 2013 by the tenant.

2. The tenant filed the Revision, challenging the fair rent fixed by the learned Rent Controller and then by the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority. The landlady filed two Revisions, challenging the fair rent fixed by the learned Rent Controller and then by the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority and for enhancement of the fair rent.

3. The landlady M.R.Junaitha Begum filed R.C.O.P.No.585 of 2013 under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, against the tenant M/s.India Tourism Development Corporation Limited, for non-residential purpose. The tenanted premises is situated at No.29, Dr.P.V.Cherian Crescent (previously Victoria Crescent Road), Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008, measuring about 5242 sq.ft. The monthly rent was fixed at Rs.45,150/-. A sum of Rs.74,175/- was paid as rental advance. The monthly rent has to be paid on the first day of every succeeding month. The petition schedule premises situated in the posh area, surrounded by Hotel Kanchi near Ethiraj College opposite to Presidency Club and Wellingdon Estate and all the important locations like Raja Muthaiah Hall, India Tourism, Spencer Plaza, Post Office, Bus Stop, Bank, Hotels, Kannimara Library, Government Arts College, Hotel Connimara and other commercial complexes etc.

4. The market value of the site, is more than Rs.3,00,00,000/- per ground in that locality. The entire superstructure comprised of fully built ground floor and partly constructed first floor. Corporation water supply, three phase electricity supply and drainage connection to corporation sewer facility exists as basic amenities. Schedule-I amenities include overhead water tank, electric motor, mosaic flooring, teak wood in joineries, glazed walling and ceramic floor areas in toilet, gardening in portico area, architectural features, partly constructed compound wall and appurtenant land exists in use to the respondent. The fair rent to this building comes to Rs.7,62,056/- per month. Therefore, this petition.

5. The tenant filed counter admitting the tenancy and the monthly rent fixed. It is claimed that the tenant came as a lessee with S.K.S.Umma Salma and on her death, her daughter S.A.Nabisa Ammal, was receiving rent on behalf of other legal representatives, as well. After the death of S.A.Nabisa Ammal, the rents were paid to the landlady M.R.Junaitha Begum and she received the rents on her behalf and as the Power agent of the legal representatives of Late S.M.Abdul Kareem.

6. Admittedly, M.R.Junaitha Begum, is not the absolute owner of the property but a co-sharer of the property. S.A.Fayaz Ahmed, grandson of Late S.M.Abdul Kareem, revoked the General Power of Attorney given in favour of M.R.Junaitha Begum and sent a letter in this regard to the tenant. A notice dated 19.04.2013 was received from S.A.Fayaz Ahmed stating that, he is entitled to 32% share in the property and called upon the tenant to enter into a separate Lease Deed for his 32% of undivided share in the property. Thereupon, a Lease Deed was entered into between the tenant and S.A.Fayaz Ahmed on 03.05.2013. 32% of the monthly rent, that is, Rs.14,448/- was being paid to S.A.Fayaz Ahmed. Concealing all these facts, the landlady M.R.Junaitha Begum filed the present R.C.O.P. She cannot claim absolute ownership to the tenanted premises and claim rent. The balance rent amount sent to M.R.Junaitha Begum through Cheque, was returned. The filing of this petition, is not a bona fide but it is an attempt to get unjust enrichment. The landlady does not have absolute right to file the present