The absence of a written rental agreement under the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017, justifies eviction, regardless of tenant's claims of willingness to formalize the agreement.

ORDER :

Challenging the concurrent findings of the Rent Controller as well as the appellate authority confirming the order of eviction under Section 21(2)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 , the present revision has been filed.

2. Brief background of filing this revision is as follows :

2.a. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a tenant under the respondents' father initially and later under the respondents. The petitioner is running a commercial establishment in the rented premises. Initially, the respondents' father Vasanthraj Khatod executed a Lease Deed in the year 1986 and thereafter in the year 2004, a fresh rental agreement entered after the demise of Vasanthraj Khatod, wherein the rent and security deposit were increased. From November 2010, the respondents claimed huge rental advance, which the petitioner refused to pay. Thereafter, eviction petition filed in R.C.O.P.No.964 of 2010 before the XVI Rent Controller, Small Causes Court, Chennai. The Rent Controller dismissed the eviction petition on the ground of owner's occupation and act of waste, however allowed the petition on the ground of subletting and causing nuisance. Aggrieved over the said order, the petitioner filed R.C.A.No.190 of 2016, which was allowed in favour of the petitioner, against which, the respondents filed a revision in C.R.P.No.2461 of 2017, which is pending before this Court.

2.b. The respondents filed R.C.O.P.No.1232 od 2016 seeking fair rent before the XV Rent Controller, Small Causes Court, Chennai, which is still pending. Not stopping with that the respondents issued notice calling upon the petitioner to vacate the premises on or before 27.01.2020. The petitioner caused a reply notice on 23.02.2020 narrating the sequence of events as to how the petitioner came in the tenancy. Thereafter the petitioner called upon the respondents to enter into a registered agreement with the petitioner as per existing law under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (hereinafter 'New Act'). Thereafter no re-joinder sent, on the other hand, the respondents filed R.L.T.O.P.No.268 of 2020 before the XI Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai and the Rent Controller by judgment dated 02.12.2022 allowed the petition directing the petitioner to vacate and handover the vacant possession. Against which, the petitioner filed R.L.T.A.No.82 of 2023 before the Rent Appellate Tribunal/XV Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. The Rent Appellate Tribunal by an order dated 28.03.2024, dismissed the appeal confirming the order passed in R.L.T.O.P.No.268 of 2020 dated 02.12.2022, against which, the present revision has been filed.

3. The primary contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner in her reply notice showed her inclination and willingness to enter into a written agreement with the respondents, which is marked as Ex.P2 before the Rent Controller. The Rent Controller not considered the same but had given a finding that the petitioner projected her willingness on paper, further referred to a cross examination of the respondents in another proceedings and observed petitioner failed to enter into the witness box and let in evidence, hence, the petitioners contention not considered.

4. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that as per Section 4(2) of the New Act the landlord and the tenant to enter into a rental agreement in writing, within a period of 575 days from the date of commencement of the Act, i.e., 22.02.2019. Even before expiry of 575 days, notice was issued and eviction petition was filed before the Rent Controller. Hence, on this ground alone, the order passed by the Rent Appellate Tribunal and Rent Court to be set aside. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for petitioner relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Ramesh Salunkhe vs. Pramila Jain reported in (2022) SCC OnLine M