The absence of a written tenancy agreement under the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 justifies eviction, and dilatory tactics by the Tenant are impermissible.

ORDER :

N.Sathish Kumar, J.

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC to set aside the fair and decretal orders dated 15.04.2024 made in M.P.No.7 of 2024 in R.L.T.O.P.No.264 of 2020 on the file of the XV Small Causes Court, Chennai and allow this Civil Revision Petition.

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order and decretal order dated 23.01.2024 in M.P.No.6 of 2022 in R.L.T.O.P.No.264 of 2020 on the file of the XV Small Causes Court, Chennai and allow this Civil Revision Petition.

A challenge has been made to the orders dated 15.04.2024 and 23.01.224 respectively made in M.P.No.7/2024 & M.P.No.6/2022 in R.L.T.O.P.No.264 of 2020.

2. The revision petitioner herein is a Tenant under R1 to R4, who are landlords and 5th respondent is a sub-tenant. For the sake of brevity, the parties are referred to as 'Landlords, Tenant and Sub-Tenant'.

3. Originally, the Landlords had filed a petition under Section 21(2)(g) of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, (in short 'the Act, 2017') for eviction of the Tenant on the ground of subletting the premises. Admittedly, the Landlords rented their premises to the Tenant on a monthly rent of Rs.21,000/- and the eviction was sought on the ground that written agreement had not been entered into between the parties, after introduction of the Act, 2017.

4. In the petition filed for eviction, no counter had been filed from 29.04.2021 and therefore, the Tenant was set ex parte on 29.06.2021. Subsequently, the Tenant had filed M.P.Nos.3 and 4 of 2021 to condone the delay of 50 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex-parte order and to set aside the ex parte order dated 29.06.2021. Those petitions were allowed on payment of costs of Rs.2,000/- each, which was to be paid on or before 06.03.2022. However, the cost had not been filed as directed by the Court, which had resulted in dismissal of M.P.Nos.3 and 4 of 2021. Thereafter, yet another two applications were filed in M.P.S.R.Nos.23086 and 23087 of 2022 to set aside the dismissal of M.P.Nos.3 and 4 of 2021, which were rejected by the Trial Court without even numbering it and the said order had not been challenged.

5. In the meanwhile, the Landlords filed a petition in M.P.No.5 of 2022 to amend the petition, seeking eviction under Section 21(2)(a) of the Act, 2017 and after amendment, the RLTOP was allowed and eviction ordered by an order dated 11.10.2022. Thereafter, once again another application in M.P.No.6 of 2022 came to be filed by the Tenant for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 11.10.2022, which was dismissed by the Rent Court on 23.01.2024. Subsequently, the Tenant had filed one more petition in M.P.No.7 of 2022 to review the order dated 23.01.2024 made in M.P.No.6 of 2022 and the same was also dismissed on 15.04.2024. Challenging both orders passed in M.P.Nos.6 & 7 of 2022, the instant Civil Revision Petitions have been filed.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the Tenant mainly submitted that eviction had been ordered on a different ground and no notice had been served on the Tenant. Further, the Landlords did not come forward to execute the agreement and the Tenant had all along been paying the monthly rent without any default. He further submitted that only for the purpose of eviction, the RLTOP was amended and ex parte decree obtained behind the back of the Tenant.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the Landlords contended that the petition for eviction had been filed as early as in the year 2020 and though the Act, 2017 mandates disposal of the petition within 60 days, the matter had been dragged on for nearly four years by filing petitions one after the other. He further contended that the Tenant was set ex parte on 29.06.2021 and despite the opportunity given by the Rent Court to participate in the proceedings on payment of Rs.2,000/- as cost, on account of non payment of cost, the petition was dismissed.