BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR S.Amaravathi Sobana represented by her Power Agent, S.Mutia Poosari Amalan. ... Petitioner in all cases -vs.-

K.C.Pon Rajendran ...Respondent in all cases PRAYER in C.R.P(MD)No.3911 of 2025 : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Subordinate Judge, Melur, dated 22.09.2025 made in R.C.A.No.4 of 2024 by set aside the order passed by the learned District Munsif/Rent Controller in I.A.No.11 of 2019 in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2018, dated

12.04.2024.

PRAYER in C.R.P(MD)No.3912 of 2025 : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Subordinate Judge, Melur, dated 22.09.2025 made in R.C.A.No.1 of 2025 by set aside the order passed by the learned District Munsif/Rent Controller in I.A.No.6 of 2019 in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2018, dated

12.04.2024.

PRAYER in C.R.P(MD)No.3913 of 2025 : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Subordinate Judge, Melur, dated 22.09.2025 made in R.C.A.No.3 of 2024 by set aside the order passed by the learned District Munsif/Rent Controller in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2018, dated 12.04.2024.

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Aravindraj For Respondent :Mr.Iniyavan Abdullah (in all cases)

*****

COMMON ORDER

The petitioner is a landlord and the respondent is a tenant. The petitioner along with one S.Muthiah Poosari Amalan initiated rent control proceedings in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2018 against the respondent before the Rent Controller (District Munsif Court), Melur, seeking an order of eviction on the ground of wilful default, demolition and reconstruction. In the said RCOP, the said S.Muthiah Poosari Amalan filed an application in I.A.No.11 of 2019, seeking to stay all further proceedings in RCOP.No.3 of 2018, which was subsequently allowed and the respondent has filed an application in I.A.No.6 of 2019, seeking to set aside the ex parte order, dated 04.02.2019 made in RCOP.No.3 of 2018, which was also allowed. Challenging both the order dated 22.09.2025, the respondent preferred appeal in RCA.Nos.4 of 2024 and 1 of 2025. The said appeals were allowed. Challenging the same, CRP(MD) Nos.3911 and 3912 of 2025 have been filed.

2.CRP(MD) No.3913 of 2025 is directed against the order dated passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Subordinate Judge, Melur, dated 22.09.2025 made in R.C.A.No.3 of 2024, reversing the order passed by the learned District Munsif/Rent Controller in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2018, dated 12.04.2024.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating all the contentions set out in the memorandum of Revision would submit that since the demised property is old, the petitioner intends to demolish the entire structures and put up new construction over the same. Hence, RCOP proceedings have been initiated as against the respondent for recovery of possession of the demised property on the ground of demolition and reconstruction along with other grounds. However, the lower appellate Court, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case properly, has allowed the appeal filed by the respondent. He would therefore pray for appropriate orders.

4.The learned legal aid counsel for the respondent would submit that in the averments of RCOP petition, it had been stated by the petitioner that she requires the petition mentioned property, which is in the occupation of the respondent, for the purpose of demolition and re construction. However, to prove her bona fide needs, the petitioner has not produced any building approved plans, extending the explicit intention