Allowed

R.Sankaranarayanan, v. S.Janaki

Madras HC22 Apr 2014CRP(MD)/910/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court held that the learned Rent Controller, Sivagiri, must dispose of the pending Rent Control Original Petition No.3 of 2010 on or before 31.08.2014 to address the four-year delay in eviction proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Rent Controller (District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate), Sivagiri, to dispose of R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2010 on or before 31.08.2014.

R.Sankaranarayanan, Vs S.Janaki — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.04.2014 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN

¶4

C.R.P.(MD)No.910 of 2014

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

R.Sankaranarayanan .. Petitioner Vs. 1.S.Janaki 2.G.Kaleeswari 3.K.Murugan 4.V.Guruvammal 5.Padma 6.Sundaravel 7.Mariappan 8.Subbulakshmi 9.Saraswathi 10.M.Ramalakshmi 11.Murugan 12.Jeevanandham 13.Kaliraj 14.Rajarajan 15.Thanga Thilagavathi 16.Sakthimariamman 17.Subbulakshmi 18.Gangalakshmi .. Respondents (Even though respondents 2 to 18 have been added, the petitioner at present has given up them as respondents and hence, no need of sending notice to them)

¶7

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a direction to the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri, to dispose of R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2010, within a time frame which may be framed by this Court.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.F.X.Eugene

¶9

ORDER

¶10

Seeking a direction to the learned Rent Controller (District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate), Sivagiri, to dispose of R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2012, within a steel framed time, which may be fixed by this Court, this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Civil Revision Petition is filed by the revision petitioner being the 10th petitioner in the above said R.C.O.P., after invoking the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶11

¶12

It is revealed from the records that the revision petitioner being the 10th petitioner along with the other seventeen petitioners has filed the Rent Control Original Petition in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2010 as against the first respondent herein under Sections 10(2)(i), 10(2)(ii) (a), 10(2)(ii)(b) and 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as amended by Act 23/73 and Act 1/80 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the eviction of the first respondent.

¶13

It is pertinent here to note that the above said Rent Control Original Petition was filed in the year 2010. Despite the fact that the first respondent herein has filed her counter statement as early as on 28.10.2011, still the above said Rent Control Original Petition is kept pending idle and the learned Rent Controller has been adopting the policy of adjourning the matter then and there without assigning any reason whatsoever.

¶14

Mr.F.X.Eugene, learned counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner has submitted that the first respondent had not chosen to pay the monthly rent as agreed from 01.07.2009 and there is wilful default from 01.07.2009 to 30.06.2010. The Revision Petitioner and other respondents 2 to 18 herein have chosen to file the Rent Control Original Petition on 14.07.2010. The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has further submitted that the first respondent being the tenant has filed the suit in O.S.No.115 of 2010 and obtained an interim order. The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has also submitted that taking advantage and umbrage on the order of interim injunction granted in the above said suit, the first respondent has been protracting the rent control proceedings successfully till today. Therefore, he has urged to issue a direction to the learned Rent Controller to dispose of the Rent Control Original Petition in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2010 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a time frame, as the interim injunction obtained by the first respondent in the said suit in O.S.No.115 of 2010 will not be a bar for her eviction, as the Rent Control Original Petition is filed within the purview of appropriate provisions of the Act.

¶15

5.This Court has considered the submission made by Mr.F.X.Eugene, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the grounds of memorandum of Civil Revision Petition including the other materials available on record.

¶16

6.It appears that the Rent Control Original Petition was filed in the year 2010 and pending for the past four years. It has been dragged on for one reason or the other successfully till today without giving quietus to the proceedings. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has submitted that there is some urgency for the eviction of the first respondent, as she had committed wilful default of payment of rent from 01.07.2009 to 30.06.2010, this Court finds that the speedy disposal of the above said R.C.O.P. is absolutely essential and inevitable.

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the learned Rent Controller (District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate),

¶18

¶19

Sivagiri, is hereby directed to dispose of R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2010 on or before 31.08.2014. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(Per Admn.)

¶21

/TRUE COPY/

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri,Tirunelveli District.

¶25

+1cc to Mr.F.X.Eugene, Advocate SR.No.24526

¶26

C.R.P.(MD)No.910 of 2014 22.04.2014

¶27

smn2

¶28

PA/06.05.2014/3P/3C

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Sankaranarayanan, v. S.Janaki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Sankaranarayanan, v. S.Janaki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Ramesh Vs v.Latha

Subbaiah, S/O. Muthukonar, Vs Nagarajan

Majibha Banu, Vs the Union of India, Rep. by

K.Jawahar (M/64), Vs a.Periyapalanichamy

Rajan Vs Retna Raj

Chandran, Vs a.R.Angusamy