Judicial determinations regarding fair rent are binding unless successfully challenged; lack of substantial questions of law leads to dismissal of appeal.

JUDGMENT

The unsuccessful defendant in the suit is the appellant. The respondent herein filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent based on the fair rent fixed by the Rent Controller. The suit was decreed by the trial court. The appeal filed by the defendant was also dismissed. Aggrieved by the concurrent findings, the appellant/defendant has come before this Court by way of second appeal.

2. According to the respondent/plaintiff, the appellant/defendant was tenant under him in respect of shop portion in Door No.562, T.H.Road, Old Washermenpet, Chennai-21. The agreed rent was Rs.850/- per month. In the year 2000, the respondent/plaintiff filed a petition in RCOP.No.537 of 2000 for fixation of fair rent against the appellant/defendant. The Rent Controller, by order dated 30.12.2002, was pleased to fix the fair rent of Rs.3,495/- per month from the date of petition ie., 27.03.2000. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent/plaintiff preferred an appeal in R.C.A.No.375 of 2003. The first appellate court affirmed the order passed by the Trial Court. Challenging the same, the appellant/defendant preferred a revision before this Court in CRP(NPD).No.3535 of 2007. The said revision was dismissed by order dated 05.04.2013. The modification petition filed by the appellant in MP.No.1 of 2015 was also dismissed by observing that if he was aggrieved by the order, he had to challenge the same before the Apex Court. Therefore, it is clear that the fair rent fixed by the Rent Controller at the rate of Rs.3,495/- had attained finality. 3. It is the specific case of the respondent/plaintiff that appellant failed to pay fair rent from 27.03.2000 to 29.03.2007 (84 months). It is admitted by the respondent that the admitted rent has been either paid or deposited before the Rent Controller in eviction proceedings. It is also seen from the averments found in the plaint that while the fair rent proceedings are pending, the appellant failed to pay agreed rent also and hence, the rent control eviction petition was filed by the respondent in RCOP.No.1454 of 2006 on the ground of wilful default and eviction order was passed on 15.11.2006. Thereafter, the respondent filed execution petition in EP.No.156 of 2007 and got delivery of the property through Court on 29.03.2007. Therefore, the instant suit has been filed seeking recovery of difference in fair rent for a period from 27.03.2000 to 29.03.2007.

4. The instant suit has been resisted by the appellant on the ground that the order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority in fair rent proceedings was challenged by him by filing a revision before the High Court. It was also stated that respondent failed to disclose the filing of revision before the High Court by the appellant challenging the order passed in fair rent proceedings and hence, there was a suppression of material fact by the respondent. The appellant also in the written statement stated that respondent fraudulently mislead the court and obtained delivery and sought for dismissal of the suit.

5. Before the Trial Court, the respondent/plaintiff was examined as P.W.1 and 16 documents were marked on his side as Ex.A1 to Ex.A16. On behalf of the appellant, he was examined as D.W.1 and 6 documents were marked on his side as Ex.B1 to Ex.B6.

6. The Trial Court, on consideration of evidence available on record, came to the conclusion that the appellant was liable to pay the balance of fair rent and decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred an appeal in A.S.No.83 of 2018 on the file of XIX Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. The first appellate court affirmed the findings of the trial court.

Aggrieved by the same, the appellant/defendant has come before this Court.

7. T