IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.12.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR and C.M.P.No.30075 of 2025 Latha Usman ... Petitioner vs.

Deepak Arulraj ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 18.07.2025 passed in M.P.No.3 of 2025 in RLTOP.No.21 of 2023 on the file of Principal District Munsif cum Rent Court, Poonamallee. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Pushpakaran For Respondent : Mr.C.Arivazhagan

O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the learned Principal District Munsif cum Rent Court, Poonamallee in M.P.No.3 of 2025 in RLTOP.No.21 of 2023, dated 18.07.2025 allowing the application filed by the respondent/tenant seeking permission for cross examination of PW.1.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. The petitioner herein filed an eviction petition under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017. The eviction was sought for under Section 21 (2)(a) (b)(g) of Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017. The respondent herein filed counter affidavit and denied the jural relationship of landlord and tenant.

4. When enquiry in the main original petition is started, the respondent/tenant filed an application seeking permission to cross examine PW.1. The learned Rent Court allowed the said application. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come before this Court.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017, the enquiry contemplated is summary in nature and the parties can be examined by filing of the proof affidavit. Therefore, the application filed by the respondent/tenant seeking cross examination of PW.1 is misconceived. 6. A perusal of pleadings of the parties would indicate that the main controversy is with regard to existence of landlord and tenant relationship. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the petitioner/landlord to lead evidence in support of her claim that there was landlord-tenant relationship. In such circumstances, the request made by the respondent/tenant seeking permission to cross examine PW.1 is justifiable in law, in the light of the controversy involved in the pleadings with regard to existence of the jural relationship. The learned Rent Court rightly allowed the application filed by the respondent/tenant seeking permission to cross examine PW.1. I do not find any irregularity or illegality in the order impugned in this civil revision petition.

7.Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.

01.12.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No dm To The Principal District Munsif cum Rent Court, Poonamallee.

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

dm

01.12.2025