G. Murugesan vs M. Gnanasekaran (Died)

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Mad) 1895

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
G. Murugesan – Appellant
Versus
M. Gnanasekaran (Died) – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : K. Hemakarthikeyan
For the Respondent: R. Sundar

Table of Content
1. relationship and default in rent payment established. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 9)
2. court upheld landlord's bonafide requirement for eviction. (Para 11 , 12 , 16)
3. tenant's failure to prove timely payment results in eviction confirmation. (Para 14 , 15 , 18)
4. final decision discussed with time allowance for tenant to vacate. (Para 22 , 23 , 25)

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr.K.Hemakarthikeyan for the petitioner and Mr.R.Sundar for the respondents.

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

3. The tenant is the civil revision petitioner.

4. He assails the fair and decreetal order of the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli in R.C.A.No.29 of 2016, dated 04.12.2025 in confirming the fair and decreetal order of the Rent Controller cum Principle District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli in R.C.O.P.No.92 of 2013, dated 24.08.2016.

5. There is no dispute in the relationship between the parties. One Gnanasekaran, was the original landlord and the civil revision petitioner Murugesan was his tenant. The landlord approached the Rent Controller in 2013, pleading that the tenant, who has to pay a monthly rent of Rs.4,500/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document