C.R.P.(PD) No.708 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.03.2022

CORAM : JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

C.R.P.(PD) No.708 of 2022

and C.M.P.No.4163 of 2022

Mrs.Mohana

... Petitioner / Respondent

Vs.

1.:Mrs.Rameesa Beevi

2.Mrs.Wadoodiya Begum

3.Mrs.Hyrun Marliya

4.Mr.Mohammed Hussain Ul Asif

5.Mr.Fouzil Ameen

6.Mr.Aysath Barika

7.Mr.M.Babu

... Respondents / Petitioner

Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution

of India, praying against the order dated 10.01.2022 in M.P.No.1 of 2021 in

RLTOP No.3 of 2020 passed by the learned XII Small Causes Court,

Chennai.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.Revathi Manivannan

1/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.(PD) No.708 of 2022

ORDER

The tenant in RLTOP No.3 of 2020 has come forward with this revision

petition, challenging an order of the Rent Court passed in M.P.No.1 of

2021, rejecting his plea on the issue of the very maintainability of RLTOP.

To provide the factual backdrop, the respondents/landlords have earlier

instituted RCOP No.286 of 2018 on the ground of wilful default in payment

of rent under Section 10(2)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and

Rent Control) Act 18 of 1960 (hence forth will be referred to as Old Act).

Besides this, there are other suit/proceedings between the parties, which are

not very germane for the current purpose. On 05.09.2019, RCOP No.286

of 2018 came to be dismissed for default. In between, on 22.02.2019, the

old Act was replaced by the Tamil Nadu Regulations of Rights and

Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act 2019 (hereinafter would

be referred to as the New Act). Subsequently, the landlords have laid the

present RLTOP No.3 of 2020 seeking eviction of the tenant that there is no

the rent agreement between the landlords and the tenant registered with the

Rent Authority is available, a ground provided under Sec.21(2)(a) of the

Act.

2/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.(PD) No.708 of 2022

2. The contention of the revision petitioner /tenant is that in terms of

Section 47(2) of the New Act, in all situations where an eviction

proceedings under the old Act was dismissed for default, the only option

open to the landlord is to restore the said proceedings, and seek the leave of

the Rent Controller for a switch over to the New Act. In the context of this

case it would mean that the landlords, if they are keen to invoke the

provisions of the new Act, should first engage in reviving RCOP No.286 of

2018, and then go through the switch-over route as provided under

Sec.47(2) of the New Act. To state it differently, a landlord who does not

follow Sec.47(2) route is barred from invoking the provisions of the New

Act. This argument was rejected by the learned Rent Court. This has

brought the tenant before this Court with this revision petition.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner was seen in her relentless

best in emphasising the sustainability of the very contention which the

tenant had advanced before the Rent Court. The efforts of the learned

counsel however, struggled to persuade this Court, as it, in the view of this

Court, roamed outside the borders of the legislative space which Sec.47(2)

of the new Act has created. Sec. 47 of the new Act reads:

“47. Repeal and savings :

(1) The Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control)

3/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.(PD) No.708 of 2022

Act, 1960 (Tamil Nadu Act 18 of 1960) is hereby

repealed.

(2) Notwithstanding such repeal and subject to the

provisions of this Act, all cases and other proceedings

under the said Act pending, at the commencement of

this Act, shall be continued and disposed of in

accordance with the provisions of the said Act, as if the

said Act had continued in force and this Act had not

been passed:

(1)

Provided that the plaintiff within a period of 180 days

of coming into force of this Act shall