High Court dismissed second appeal against eviction decree for rent arrears of Rs.10/month, upholding concurrent findings that tenant willfully defaulted on rent, and directed vacation within 10 months.
Directed defendants to vacate premises within 10 months from receipt of order copy.
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.
S.A. No.1200 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
S.A. No.1200 of 2009 and M.P.No. 1 of 2009
Adhilakshmi Ammal (died)
Vs.
Pazhaverkadu Venkatasami Gramani Trust,
by its Trustee S. Venkatraman .. Respondent
PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 24.06.2009 passed in A.S.No.71 of 2004 on the file of Addl. District Judge, Fast Track Court
1/6
S.A. No.1200 of 2009
No.III, Tiruvallur confirming judgment and decree dated 27.04.2004 passed in O.S.No.639 of 1996 on the file of District Munsif Court, Tiruvallur.
For Appellants : Mr. I.Kowser Nissan For Respondent : Mr.C.Uma Shankar JUDGMENT
The appellants, who are the defendants in the suit in O.S. No. 639 of 1996, against whom, the respondent/plaintiff herein obtained a decree of eviction from the suit premises with arrears of rent. Challenging the same, the defendants preferred an appeal in A.S.No. 71 of 2004, wherein the findings of trial judge was confirmed. Challenging the concurrent findings of the courts, the defendants preferred this Second Appeal.
no arrears in payment of rent. But, the courts below failed to appreciate the said fact and erroneously ordered for eviction, which needs interference of this court. Accordingly, he prayed to set aside the findings of courts below.
2/6
S.A. No.1200 of 2009
admitted on the following question of law :-
(a) Whether the lower appellate court erred in not
allowing the appeal?
(b) Whether the judgment and decree of the courts below are not in accordance with law having failed to properly appreciate the oral and documentary evidence?
eviction without going into the aspect of termination of tenancy?
3/6
S.A. No.1200 of 2009
The contention of defendants is that they are in possession of suit premises as a tenant for more than 55 years and paying rent of Rs.10/regularly and there is no default in payment of rent.
Already the plaintiff issued a notice and the same was replied by the defendants stating that they have paid the rent regularly, but they have not furnished any receipts for the same before the trial court. Therefore, on observing all those facts, the trial court granted the relief in favour of plaintiff. However, now the building is in a dilapidated condition. Against which, the defendants preferred an appeal and the first appellate judge on analysing facts and evidence, dismissed the appeal suit and confirmed the findings of trial judge. Challenging the same, the defendants preferred this Second Appeal.
respondent/plaintiff would submit that there is an arrears of rent, but it was not paid till date and the same is also not in dispute, however they
4/6
S.A. No.1200 of 2009
have not produced any receipt to show that they have paid the rent before the suit and after the suit, thereby the appellants/defendants committed willful default in payment of rent. Admittedly, his property is in Tiruvallur Town and a meagre rent of Rs.10/- also has not been paid by the defendants. Therefore, both the courts below rightly granted relief of eviction in favour of plaintiff, which needs no interference. Accordingly, this Second Appeal is dismissed. The defendants are directed to vacate the premises within a period of 10 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
06.09.2024
Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Speaking/Non-speaking order rpp To
The Addl. District Judge-Fast Track Court No.III, Tiruvallur.
5/6
S.A. No.1200 of 2009
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
rpp
Pre-delivery judgment in S.A. No.1200 of 2009
06.09.2024
6/6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the lower appellate court erred in not allowing the appeal?
Whether the judgment and decree of the courts below are not in accordance with law having failed to properly appreciate the oral and documentary evidence?
Whether the courts below are right in ordering eviction without going into the aspect of termination of tenancy?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Emarose
Raja
Mohan
Pazhaverkadu Venkatasami Gramani Trust
T.V. Thamilselvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
