The Rent Court can issue eviction orders based on admissions in pleadings without requiring witness evidence, as proceedings are meant to be summary in nature under the Act.

ORDER :

N. Sathish Kumar, J.

Challenging the order dated 06.11.2023 made in R.L.T.A.No.72 of 2022 on the file of the learned XXIII Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai (Rent Tribunal) thereby confirming the order made in R.L.T.O.P.No.464 of 2021 dated 18.04.2022 on the file of the learned XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Court), the present Revision Petition has been filed.

Background of the case in nutshell:

2. The Revision Petitioner was a tenant of a commercial shop owned by the 1st respondent herein to an extent of 116 sq.ft. from the year 1990 and no rental agreement has been entered into between the parties. Now, the present rent is Rs.5,000/-, which was agreed between the parties in the year 2011. The 1st respondent herein had filed an application under Section 21(2)(a) of the TAMIL NADU REGULATION OF RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF LANDLORDS AND TENANTS ACT , 2017 (in short 'the Act, 2017') for eviction of the revision petitioner.

3. The main argument put forth by the revision petitioner before the Trial Court was that as per the Act, 2017, there was no rental agreement entered into or registered with the Rent Authority and de hors the same, the 1st respondent herein has been attempting to evict the revision petitioner on false ground. The fault on the part of the 1st respondent in not entering any agreement with the revision petitioner cannot be taken advantage so as to invoke Section 21(2)(a) of the Act, 2017.

4. Learned Rent Court, on finding that there was an admission with regard to tenancy, held that no further witness is required in the matter and the matter can be decided on the basis of the admission made in the pleadings itself and ordered for eviction of the revision petitioner and the said order of the learned Rent Court has been confirmed by the Appellate Authority, namely, Rent Tribunal.

5. Though various grounds have been raised in this petition, learned counsel for the revision petitioner confined his submission on one point to the extent that learned Trial Court ought not to have decided the issue without there being any evidence let in by the witness. He further stated that Section 36 of the Act, 2017 r/w Rule 9 makes it clear that evidence of a witness shall be given by affidavit and in the absence of any evidence by way of an affidavit, the matter cannot be proceeded with, as it is against the Statute.

6. In contra, learned counsel for the 1st respondent contended that proceeding before the Rent Court is only a summary in nature and only when the parties intend to examine any witness, such evidence should be by way of affidavit. He further contended that non-adducing of evidence by the parties will not take away the powers of the Rent Court to decide the issue based on the available evidence. In support of his submission, he relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of T.Muthuraj vs. K.Saroja and others (C.R.P.No.4355 of 2022) decided on 05.01.2023.

7. I have perused the entire materials available on record.

8. The short point involved in this case is as to whether eviction order can be passed by the learned Rent Court without there being any evidence. This Court is inclined to decide the said point alone. The Act, 2017 mainly aims to regulate the rent and to balance the rights and responsibilities of landlords and tenants and to provide regulation of the rent as per the agreement. The Repealed Act, namely, Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (Act 18 of 1960) had created a lot of vested interest against the landlords and further, the supply of the rental housing and growth of rental housing market has been severely affected leading to growth of slums in absence of sufficient stock of rental houses. To