Disposed

K.Paramasiva Nadar v. Grama Rajya Nirmana Sangam

Madras HC22 Oct 2019CRP(MD)/2430/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a civil revision petition pursuant to a joint compromise memo. The decree allowed the petitioner-tenant to occupy a specific portion of the premises for two years at a monthly rent of Rs. 7,500 while handing over the remainder to the respondent-landlord.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to occupy specific portion for two years at Rs.7,500/month upon depositing satisfaction in pending execution petition; remaining property handed over to respondent.

K.Paramasiva Nadar Vs Grama Rajya Nirmana Sangam — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

CRP(MD). No.2430 of 2008

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

(Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

¶4

Tuesday, the Twenty Second day of October Two Thousand and Nineteen

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon'ble Ms.Justice P.T.ASHA

¶7

CRP(MD). No.2430 of 2008

¶8

K.PARAMASIVA NADAR ...Petitioner/Appellant/Respondent(Tenant)

¶9

¶10

GRAMA RAJYA NIRMANA SANGAM, NEW PENSIONER STREET,DINDIGUL THROUGH ITS SECRETARY. ... Respondent/Respondent/Petitioner(Landlord)

¶11

Prayer :-

¶12

Civil Revision Petition is filed under section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 to call for the records and the fair and executable order dated 12.11.2008 in R.C.A.No.1 of 2003 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge cum Rent Control Appellate Authority, Dindigul confirming the far and executable order dated 02.12.2002 in R.C.O.P.No.34 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Munsif cum Rent Controller, Dindigul.

¶13

Decree :

¶14

Civil Revision Petition is coming on for hearing on this day upon perusing the Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar, Advocate appearing for the petitioner and of Mr.B.Rajesh, Advocate appearing for the respondent and considering the Joint Compromise Memo dated 17.10.2019 filed in CRP (MD) No.2430 of 2008 by both the parties and their respective counsels, this Court while disposing in terms of the above said Joint Memo, doth order and decree the parties before different forums, the parties have agreed to enter into the present compromise as follows:-

¶15

1 That the parties have agreed that the Petitioner/Tenant will continue to be in occupation of the area approximately 4250 sq.ft., which is shown in blue wash in the attached plan for a period 2 years up to 30.09.2021 and the remaining portion of the schedule of property excluding the blue-washed portion has been handed over by the petitioner/tenant to the respondent/landlord immediately and the landlord, as the real owner, shall be there without any disturbance or hindrance whatsoever from the petitioner/tenant https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 That, in consideration of his occupation of the blue-washed

¶16

1/3

¶17

CRP(MD). No.2430 of 2008

¶18

portion, the petitioner/tenant shall pay a monthly rent in a sum of Rs.7,500/- per month (Rupees Seven Thousand and Five Hundred only) to the respondent/landlord without committing any default and on the expiry of the above terms of tenancy, the petitioner/tenant shall vacate and handover the possession of the premises to the respondent/landlord;

¶19

3 That, on expiry of the time agreed above ie., 2 years, immediately the Revision petitioner/Tenant shall vacate and handover the premises to the Respondent/Londlord. After 30.09.2021, the petitioner/tenant cannot claim any right or interest whatsoever in respect of the portion let out to him;

¶20

4 That, with regard to the E.P.No.745 of 1996 which is pending on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Dindigul filed by the Revision Petitioner/Tenant, as a petitioner, in the capacity as an assignee/decree holder for recover of a sum of Rs.61,852/-, the Revision Petition has agreed to give a quietus by filing a full satisfaction memo in tune with the adjustment of the arrears of rent for the previous period and there shall not be any claim by pursuing the said Execution Petition further on any ground;

¶21

5 That, the parties agreed to bear their respective costs. The parties shall not have any further claims against each other except that arising out of the relationship of tenant and landlord in regard to the demarked blue-washed rental portion shown in the rough sketch, which forms part of this compromise;

¶22

6 That, both parties have agreed to the terms of this compromise and this compromise memo may be made as part of the final order to be passed by this Hon'ble Court in this Civil Revision Petition.

¶23

7 That there be no costs in this Civil Revision Petition.

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

¶26

1 The Principal Subordinate Judge cum Rent Control Appellate Authority, Dindigul.

¶27

2 The Principal District Munsif cum Rent Controller, Dindigul Copy to:

¶28

The Record Keeper, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.(+2copies)

¶29

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

¶30

2/3

¶31

CRP(MD). No.2430 of 2008

¶32

1 CC to Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar, Advocate in SR.93971

¶33

2 CC to Mr.B.Rajesh, Advocate in SR.93461

¶34

DATED : 22/10/2019

¶35

========================== JOINT COMPROMISE DECREE ========================== CRP(MD). No.2430 of 2008

¶36

NATURE OF DECREE:

¶37

JOINT COMPROMISE DECREE etc., as stated within

¶38

KK/SAR/19.11.2019/3P-7C/

¶39

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

¶40

3/3

K.Paramasiva Nadar v. Grama Rajya Nirmana Sangam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Paramasiva Nadar v. Grama Rajya Nirmana Sangam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J.Jabaselvi Vs the Administrative Officer &

V.Ayyadurai S/O.Vaiyapuri Vs v.Nirmala D/O.Veerasamy

S.Arjunan Vs P.Murugaiyan

A.R.R.Seenivasan, Vs a.R.v.Ramachandran

R.Pradeepa Vs S.Ilango

Nagalakshmi Vs Dinesh