Revision petition challenging eviction order maintained. Court held eviction maintainable as landlords have share, not absolute title, and require residence in 2nd floor without lift due to age/health.
Petitioner to vacate and hand over possession by 31.08.2015 and pay future rent regularly.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.02.2015
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
C.R.P.No.166 of 2015 & M.P.No.1 of 2015
Vijayakumar ...Petitioner/
Appellant/Tenant
Vs
T.D.Eswarlal (Deceased)
1.Geetha Rani
2.Kavitha
3.Savitha ...Respondents/
Petitioners/Landlords
Prayer:- This Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25(1) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act,) 1960 Praying to set aside the fair order and decreetal order dated 01.11.2014 made in RCA.No.498 of 2011 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority/VIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai and confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 18.07.2011 made in RCOP.No.2572 of 2009 on the file of the Rent Controller/X Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
For Respondents : Mr.G.Ashokapathy for M/s.Pass Associates
O R D E R
The tenant in RCOP.No.498 of 2011 is the petitioner in the present revision. The first respondent along with her husband T.D.Eswarlal (deceased) filed an eviction petition against the petitioner under Section 10(3) (a) (i) of Tamil Nadu Lease and Rent Control Act. The landlords have averred in the eviction petition that they are residing in a house which does not belong to them absolutely and the building was owned by the father of the first petitioner, who died leaving behind three sons and five daughters as his legal heirs. Now the petitioners are residing in a small portion of the premises. They are suffering from Arthritis and they are diabetic patients. At their old age, they are finding it difficult to climb to the second floor. Though the petition premises is situated in the second floor, it is provided with lift. The landlords contended that the requirement of the petition peremises for own use and occupation is a bonafide one.
present premises does not beong to them absolutely and the first respondent was having a meager share in the premises; that if the landlady is residing in her property, Section 10(3)(c) bars landlords from filing eviction petition, therefore, the eviction petition is maintainable in law. It is further submitted that the landlords with their hard earned money purchased the property only for their own use and occupation and even after the death of the first respondent, the second respondent is very much interested to reside in the tenanted premises and she finds it difficult to get along with the joint family property along with sibilings of her husband.
In case it is residential building, if the landlord requires it for his own occupation or for the occupation of (any member of his family) and if he or (any member oif his family) is not occupying a residential building of his own in the city, town or village concerned.
A Plain reading of the provision would show, a landlord, who is occupying a residential building of his own in the city, town or village cannot seek eviction of the tenant for his own occupation or for the occupation of any member of his family. Ex.P.6 Sale Deed, Ex.P.7 Legal heirship certificate and the evidence of P.W.1 would reveal that the landlords are not the absolute owner of the premises in their occupation. Therefore, I am of the view that the eviction petition is maintainable.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kkd
To
1. The Rent Control Appellate Authority/VIII Judge,
Small Causes Court, Chennai
2. The Rent Controller/X Judge,
Small Causes Court, Chennai.
CRP.NPD.No.166 of 2015
and M.P.No.1 of 2015
GJ (CO)
PSI (15.04.2015)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an eviction petition under Section 10(3)(a)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act) is maintainable when landlords have a shared interest and require premises for their res
Whether the requirement of a residential apartment for own occupation constitutes a bonafide ground for eviction.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijayakumar
Geetha Rani
K.Kalyanasundaram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
