The Madras High Court dismissed a Civil Revision Petition filed by a tenant. The petitioner challenged an order denying him time to deposit arrears of rent. The Court held that the one-year delay and failure to deposit any amount justified dismissing the revision.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 01.03.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU
C.R.P(MD)No.422 of 2018 (PD) and C.M.P.(MD).No.1854 of 2018
Jenefir Nirmalsingh
.. Petitioner / Respondent / Respondent
Vs.
M/s.Pearl City Engineering Builders, rep. by its partners, 1.S.Ramesh Kumar 2.S.Suresh Kumar having its Office at 46 A/2 H, Palayamkottai Road, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District. ... Respondent / Petitioner / Petitioner
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order, dated 14.02.2018, passed in E.P.No.96 of 2017 in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2016 by the learned Rent Controller cum Principal District Munsif, Thoothukudi.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Jegannathan for M/S.Veera Associates For respondent : Mr.M.P.Senthil
ORDER
This civil revision petition has been filed by the revision petitioner / tenant as against the order, dated 14.02.2018, passed in the execution petition in E.P.No.96 of 2017 in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2016 by the learned Rent Controller cum Principal District Munsif, Thoothukudi.
2.The respondent / landlord had filed a petition in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2016 for willful default in payment of the rent from October, 2015 and for own occupation. The respondent / landlord had also filed I.A.No.143 of 2016 seeking a direction to the revision petitioner / tenant to deposit the arrears of rent and the same was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ordered on 16.02.2017 directing the revision petitioner / tenant to deposit the arrears of rent of Rs.3,75,000/- on or before
2
01.03.2017, failing which the revision petitioner / tenant shall vacate the said premises within a period of one month. During the interregnum period, the revision petitioner / tenant has filed R.C.O.P.No.28 of 2017 for fixation of fair rent. The revision petitioner / tenant has also preferred an appeal, as against the order, dated 16.02.2017, passed in I.A.No.143 of 2016 in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2016 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, but the same is pending in delay condonation stage. While so, the respondent / landlord had filed E.P.No.96 of 2017 and the same was, after hearing both sides, ordered holding that the revision petitioner / tenant did not even take any steps to deposit Rs.3,75,000/-. Aggrieved by that order, the revision petitioner / tenant has filed this revision petition.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(T & P)
/True copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
3
To
1.The Principal District Munsif(Rent Controller), Tuticorin.
2.The Record Keeper,(2 Copies) V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
order made in C.R.P(MD)No.422 of 2018 (PD) 01.03.2018
gcg MS/KK/SAR-2/21.03.2018/3P.6C
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Civil Revision Petition by a tenant who failed to deposit arrears of rent after a court order should be allowed.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the lower court's order dismissing the tenant's petition due to non-payment of rent.
Jenefir Nirmalsingh
M/s. Pearl City Engineering Builders
J. Nisha Banu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
