Advocates:
['c/v filed by m/s b mohan', '', 'k prasanth', 'V EZHILAN-MS', 'p sidharthan', 'M/S M BALASUBRAMANIAN', '', 'CAVEATOR /', 'P VENNITHARAN', 'B DHIYANESWARAN']

A.S.No.268 of 2016

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Orders Reserved on

26.04.2022

Orders pronounced on

24.06.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S. KANNAMMAL

A.S.No.268 of 2016

and

CMP No.4384 of 2016 & 17683 of 2017

Chandra Kumar

... Appellant/Defendant

Vs.

S.Mallika

represented by her Power of Attorney

Mr.M.Sivakumar

... Respondent/Plaintiff

Appeal Suit is filed under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code

to set aside the Judgment and Decree of the III Additional Judge, City

Civil Court, Chennai, dated 31.07.2015 made in O.S.No.186 of 2011.

For Appellant

: M/s.B.Mohan

for

M/s.P.Gunaraj

For Respondent

: Mr. M.Balasubramanian

Page 1 / 32

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

A.S.No.268 of 2016

J U D G M E N T

The Appellant, who is the defendant in O.S.No.186 of 2011, has

filed this appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 31.07.2015,

passed by the learned III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

2.

The brief facts, as averred by the plaintiff (respondent

herein) in the original suit, are as follows:

2(i)

The plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit property

having purchased the same under valid sale deed vide Document

No.2537 of 2010 registered on 22.07.2010 on the file of Sub Registrar,

Kodambakkam from her vendors, who had absolute right over the

property as on the date of execution of sale deed. She, after the purchase

of the said property, paid property tax and water tax and also transferred

the Electricity Consumption Account in her name.

2(ii) Since the defendant unlawfully trespassed into the premises

without any valid right, plaintiff issued legal notice on 30.08.2010 by

Page 2 / 32

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

A.S.No.268 of 2016

calling upon the defendant to vacate the premises which was under her

unlawful occupation, within 15 days from the date of receipt of legal

notice and also to pay damages for use and occupation of the suit

property after the date stipulated in the legal notice. But the defendant

refused to receive the said notice. Inspite of repeated demands, the

defendant failed and neglected to vacate the premises and to pay the

damages. The defendant is liable to pay the damages from 01.09.2010

onwards at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month till he vacates the premises.

2(iii) The plaintiff was put in possession and enjoyment of the

property as absolute owners by her vendor, after paying entire sale

consideration. An Assessment notice dated 08.04.2009 was issued by the

Corporation of Madras to the vendors o the plaintiff. Therefore, the

vendors of the plaintiff had been in absolute use and enjoyment of the

property from the date of purchase from the Tamil Nadu Housing Board

with reference to the application dated 28.02.1973 submitted by the

vendors of the plaintiff to have the allotment in their name. As such from

the date of allotment and execution of sale deed dated 28.03.1994, the

Page 3 / 32

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

A.S.No.268 of 2016

vendors of the plaintiff had been in absolute use and enjoyment of the

property.

2(iv) Vendors of the plaintiff entered into an agreement with

Mrs.P.Sundari, so as to have the leasehold right for five years with effect

from 30.05.1979 and the said Sundari was allowed to reside in the said

premises for five years. Thereafter, the said Sundari left that premises

without paying any rent payable to the vendors of the plaintiff but the

defendant alleged to be the brother of said Sundari and he was allowed to

make use and occupy the said premises without consent or concurrence

of the vendors of the plaintiff. When the vendors of the plaintiff sent a

notice to the defendant the defendant failed and neglected to pay the rent

and refused to vacate, but made himself liable to pay the charges as

damage for the premise being occupied by him and declined to be called

as a tenant. In the RCOP filed b