O R D E R

These Civil Revision Petitions are arising out of orders passed in R.C.A.No.52 and 53 of 2014 dated 31.07.2015 on the file of the VII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, confirming the orders dated 09.12.2013 in RCOP.No.1802 of 2011 and RCOP.No.2052 of 2012 on the file of the XII Small Causes Court, Chennai.

2. The petitioners in both the Civil Revision Petitions are the landlords (hereinafter called as landlords). The respondent is the tenant (hereinafter called as tenant). The landlords filed a petition for eviction on the ground of wilful default, own occupation and denial of title. The landlords also filed a petition for fixation of fair rent for the petition premises. The learned Rent Controller dismissed the petition for eviction on all the grounds and also dismissed the petition for fixation of fair rent. Aggrieved by both the orders passed by the learned Rent Controller, the landlords filed an appeal before the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority. The learned Rent Control Appellate Authority also dismissed both the appeals. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petitions.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners/landlords submitted that they are the absolute owners of the petition premises from the date of purchase of the petition premises from one Mrs.A.Zainabu Beevi, represented by her elder son Power Agent viz. A.J.Zahir Ali. After purchase of the petition premises, the vendor issued letter for attornment of the tenancy to the tenant. In fact, the landlords also sent a letter to the tenant, in respect of attornment of tenancy. Thereafter, the tenant did not pay any rent and also stated that there was a pre-emption agreement and as such, the sale itself is not binding on him. He further submitted that from the year June 2010 onwards, the tenant has defaulted in payment of rents. The tenant filed a suit in C.S.No.825 of 2010 before this Court for declaration to declare the sale deed dated 02.06.2010, registered vide document No.668/2010 executed in favour of the landlords is not binding on the tenant. Further, the prayer in the said suit was also for declaration that the pre-emption agreement dated 05.11.1998 is binding on the vendor of the landlords as well as the tenant herein and on the strength of the same, the tenant also filed the said suit for specific performance as per the said agreement and also consequential permanent injunction.

4. The respondent is admittedly a tenant and it is settled law that a tenant is always a tenant, unless there is a merger of the tenancy with the ownership. While pending the said suit, the landlords filed an application to reject the plaint and the same was dismissed by this Court. Aggrieved by the same, the landlords have filed an appeal in OSA.No.185 of 2018 before this Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court and the same was allowed by the judgment and decree dated 17.07.2018. Aggrieved by the same, the tenant herein filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP.No.31844 of 2018 and it is pending. Thereafter, the plaint itself was rejected and alleged pre-emption agreement dated 05.11.1998 is not in force. The civil dispute, in respect of denial of title, ended in favour of the landlords herein and as such, he sought for eviction of tenant for the petition premises. He further submitted in fact, the letter of attornment of tenancy was also duly informed to the tenant. In support of his contentions, he relied upon the judgments reported in AIR 1989 SC 553 (S.B.Abdul Azeez -vs- M.Maniyappa Setty), 2009 SCC online Mad 2040=2010 (2) LW 104 (Elumalai -vs- Kotteeswaran @ Kotti Naicker), 2015 (13) SCC 13 (Ambica Prasad -vs- Mohd.Alam) and 2011 (2) MWN (Civil) 667 (K.Mani -vs-M.D.Jayavel).

5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent/tenant contended that there is no relationship of landlords and tenant between the petitioners and the respondent herein at any point of time. In the year 1987, the tenant was inducted as tenant by A.Zain