Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
V. S. Mohan – Appellant
Versus
Sarath Naseera – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Bijesh Thomas
For the Respondents: Sivakumar for P.B. Ramanujam Associates

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)

What is the effect of Tamil Nadu Act 42 of 2017 Section 21(2)(a) on eviction when there is no written tenancy agreement?

What is the status of cross-examination rights under Section 36(2) of Act 42 of 2017 in eviction proceedings?

What is the propriety of proceeding with trial/merits while a Civil Revision Petition is pending under Section 115(3) CPC or Article 227?

ORDER :

V. Lakshminarayanan, J.

1. This Civil Revision Petition arises against the order passed by the learned XV Small Causes Judge-cum-Rent Controller at Chennai in M.P.No.1 of 2022 in R.L.T.O.P.No.497 of 2022, dated 02.02.2023. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute. The civil revision petitioner is a tenant of the premises being owned by the respondents/landlords.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as landlords and tenant.

3. The landlords initiated R.LT.O.P.No.497 of 2022 seeking for eviction. The petition was filed invoking the provisions of Section 21(2)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (for brevity 'Tamil Nadu Act 42 of 2017'). Their simple case is that a petition was filed for fixation of fair rent in R.C.O.P.No.1812 of 2008 and the said petition was ordered fixing the fair rent at Rs.4,220/- per month. An appeal preferred therefrom in R.C.A.No.559 of 2010 came to be dismissed on 26.10.2017. Despite the fixation of the fair rent having attained finality, the landlords pleaded that the tenant had not paid the same. Therefore, they decided that they did not want the ten

Click Here to Read the rest of this document