This joint order dismissed five civil revision petitions challenging eviction decrees. The Court held that since the land belonged to a temple and tenants were inducted by it, no landlord-tenant relationship existed with the petitioner, rendering the eviction petitions non-maintainable.
Five civil revision petitions were dismissed with no order as to costs.
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.
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
CRP.No.3213 of 2015
E.Khader Sherif ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Munusamy 2.A.Gajapathy (2nd respondent impleaded vide order dated 13.12.2022 in CMP.No.15929 of 2022 in CRP.No.3213 of 2015) ... Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Revision petition is filed under Section 25 of Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as amended by Act XXIII of 1973 and Act I of 1980 to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 14.11.2003 and made in RCOP.No.1786 of 2002 on the file of the X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai as confirmed in the judgment and decree dated 11.11.2014 and made in RCA.No.1558 of 2003 on the file of the VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Control Appellate Authority).
For Petitioner : Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed
For Respondents For R1 : Mr.K.Sathish Babu For R2 : Mrs.G.Sumithra
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 1 of 8
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
CRP.No.3214 of 2015
E.Khader Sherif
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Selvi 2.A.Gajapathy (2nd respondent impleaded vide order dated 13.12.2022 in CMP.No.15930 of 2022 in CRP.No.3214 of 2015) ... Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Revision petition is filed under Section 25 of Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as amended by Act XXIII of 1973 and Act I of 1980 to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 14.11.2003 and made in RCOP.No.1790 of 2002 on the file of the X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai as confirmed in the judgment and decree dated 11.11.2014 and made in RCA.No.1556 of 2003 on the file of the VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Control Appellate Authority).
For Petitioner : Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed
For Respondents For R1 : Mr.K.Sathish Babu For R2 : Mrs.G.Sumithra
CRP.No.3215 of 2015
E.Khader Sherif ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Abdul Khader 2.A.Gajapathy (2nd respondent impleaded vide order dated 13.12.2022 in CMP.No.15188 of 2022 in CRP.No.3215 of 2015) ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 2 of 8
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
PRAYER
PRAYER : Civil Revision petition is filed under Section 25 of Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as amended by Act XXIII of 1973 and Act I of 1980 to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 14.11.2003 and made in RCOP.No.1787 of 2002 on the file of the X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai as confirmed in the judgment and decree dated 11.11.2014 and made in RCA.No.1557 of 2003 on the file of the VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Control Appellate Authority).
For Petitioner : Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed
For Respondents For R1 : Mr.K.Sathish Babu For R2 : Mrs.G.Sumithra
CRP.No.3216 of 2015
E.Khader Sherif ... Petitioner
Vs. Sakunthala (deceased) 1.Ravi 2.Balaji 3.A.Gajapathy (3rd respondent impleaded vide order dated 13.12.2022 in CMP.No.15910 of 2022 in CRP.No.3216 of 2015) ... Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Revision petition is filed under Section 25 of Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as amended by Act XXIII of 1973 and Act I of 1980 to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 14.11.2003 and made in RCOP.No.1788 of 2002 on the file of the X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai as confirmed in the judgment and decree
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 3 of 8
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
dated 11.11.2014 and made in RCA.No.1559 of 2003 on the file of the VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Control Appellate Authority).
For Petitioner : Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed
For Respondents For R1 & 2 : Mr.K.Sathish Babu For R3 : Mrs.G.Sumithra
CRP.No.3217 of 2015
E.Khader Sherif ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Kuppusamy (deceased) 2.Selvi 3.A.Gajapathy (3rd respondent impleaded vide order dated 13.12.2022 in CMP.No.15927 of 2022 in CRP.No.3217 of 2015) ... Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Revision petition is filed under Section 25 of Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as amended by Act XXIII of 1973 and Act I of 1980 to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 14.11.2003 and made in RCOP.No.1789 of 2002 on the file of the X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai as confirmed in the judgment and decree dated 11.11.2014 and made in RCA.No.1560 of 2003 on the file of the VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Control Appellate Authority).
For Petitioner : Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed
For Respondents For R1 & 2 : Mr.K.Sathish Babu For R3 : Mrs.G.Sumithra
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 4 of 8
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
COMMON ORDER
The civil revision petitions have been filed to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 14.11.2003 and made in RCOP.Nos.1786, 1790, 1787, 1788 & 1789 of 2002 on the file of the X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai as confirmed in the judgment and decree dated 11.11.2014 made in RCA.Nos.1558, 1556, 1557, 1559 & 1560 of 2003 on the file of the VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Control Appellate Authority).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 5 of 8
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
eviction itself is not maintainable. At no point of time, the petitioner acted as landlord. Therefore, the petitioner has no cause of action to file petition for eviction. In support of the contention of the petitioner, he examined PW1 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P22. On the side of the tenants, they examined RW1 to RW5 and marked Ex.R1 to Ex.R6.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 6 of 8
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
the Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, rents are assessed for the premises and the tenants are paying rents as fixed by the temple authorities. Therefore, the courts below rightly dismissed the petitions filed by the petitioner and this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the orders passed by the courts below.
13.12.2022 Index :Yes/No (2/2) Internet : Yes/No Speaking order/non-speaking order lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 7 of 8
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
lok
To
1.X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai 2.The VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Control Appellate Authority).
CRP.Nos.3213 to 3217 of 2015
13.12.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 8 of 8
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petitioner can maintain an eviction petition when the land belongs to a temple and the tenants were inducted by the temple.
Whether there existed a valid landlord-tenancy relationship between the petitioner and the respondents in rent control proceedings.
Whether the orders of the Rent Controller and the Rent Control Appellate Authority dismissing the eviction petitions are correct.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
E.Khader Sherif
Munusamy
Selvi
Abdul Khader
Sakunthala (deceased)
Kuppusamy (deceased)
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
