IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on : 27.03.2024 Pronounced on : 07.06.2024 CORAM : JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE S.A.No.34 of 2021 and CMP.No.959 of 2021 H.Krishnamurthi Rao Malathkar Managing Trustee cum President of B.K.Sri Panduranga Mandir Having Office at :

B.K.Sri Panduranga Mandir No.47/22, Subadral Street Thiruvetteeswaranpet Triplicane Chennai - 600 005. .. Appellant / Respondent / Defendant Vs S.Sivaganesh Rao Ghatte S/o.Late G.R.Sundramoorthy Rao Ghatte No.16/33, Chella Pillayar Koil Street Royapettah, Chennai - 600 014.

[Door Number amended as No.16/33 vide order of Court dated 12.03.2021 made in S.A.No.34/2021] .. Respondent /Appellant / Plaintiff Prayer : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code praying to allow the appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.187/2019 dated 26.11.2019 by the XVII Additional City Civil Judge, Chennai, reversing the judgment and decree passed by XV Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai in O.S.No.5653/2015 dated 08.12.2017 and pass such necessary order as this Court may deem fit in the circumstance of the case.

For Appellant : Mr.Adinarayana Rao For Respondent : Mr.C.Sivanesan JUDGMENT The defendant who was successful in defending a suit for defamation before the trial Court, but faced with a reversal in fortune before the first appellate Court, has come forward with this appeal. Parties would be referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

2. The facts are as below :

a) B.K.Sri Panduranga Mandir was created vide a Trust Deed dated

07.09.1937, executed by the then founders of the Trust, and B.K.Sri Panduranga Bhakthajana Sabha is a part of this Mandir. Its affairs were managed by the Managing Committee, of which, the plaintiff was an office bearer sometime in 2008.

b) The said Mandir possessed several immovable properties in Chennai, of which, one premises is located at Chella Pillaiyar Koil Street at Royapettah. The plaintiff became the tenant of the said premises from November 2009, and as per the terms of the lease, the plaintiff was required to pay a sum of Rs.2,250/- as monthly rent.

c) While so, on 14.02.2014, this plaintiff met with an accident and fractured his left hand. As the premises in which the plaintiff was a tenant lacked certain amenities, the plaintiff moved to his relative's place elsewhere in the city. In the meantime, the wooden door fittings etc., in the house suffered termite attack and other damages. Hence, on 29.06.2014, the plaintiff sent a letter to the Managing Committee of the Mandir to replace the said door. The plaintiff's request however did not evoke any response from the defendant.

d) Thereafter, he was orally permitted to carry out the necessary repairs in the premises, and was required to adjust the expenses incurred against the rentals. Accordingly, in February, 2015, the plaintiff expended Rs.15,100/- for repairing the wooden doors and for maintenance.

e) The plaintiff had paid the rents up to September 2014, and from October 2014 to May 2015, the total rent payable was Rs.18,000/-. Towards payment of this arrears, the plaintiff had issued a cheque dated 17.06.2015 for Rs.2,900/-, after adjusting Rs.15,100/- which he had expended for maintenance of his lease hold building. Along with the cheque, he had enclosed all the bills and vouchers supporting the expenditure he claimed to have incurred.

f) The cheque for Rs.2,900/- was accepted by the defendant, but the Managing Trustee of the Mandir shot a letter dated 06.07.2015, wherein he had questioned the propriety of the plaintiff in replacing the damaged doors etc., The genuineness of the vouchers and bills submitted by the plaintiff was also questioned. And, the defendant claimed that the plaintiff is liable to pay a sum of Rs.29,500/- as arrears of rent. The said claim was intended to bring disrepute to the plaintiff.

g) The plaintiff has every reason to believe that the claim was motivated, and this was engineered by two other individuals, whose cont