Disposed

Thanikachalam Alias Thanikachala Perumal v. Ponram

Madras HC2 Jun 2025CRP(MD)/1495/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Landlord sought expeditious disposal of two execution petitions pending before the Rent Controlling Authority, Dindigul, arising from fair rent fixation and eviction orders. The High Court directed the court to conclude both execution proceedings within three months and disposed of the revision petitions without costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conclude both execution petitions within three months; no notice to respondent; no costs.

Thanikachalam Alias Thanikachala Perumal Vs Ponram — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)Nos.1495 & 1496 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 02.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)Nos.1495 & 1496 of 2025

¶7

Thanikachalam @ Thanikachala Perumal ...Petitioner in both petitions

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Ponram ...Respondent in both petitions

¶10

COMMON PRAYER: Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge (Rent Controlling Authority) Dindigul to expedite the execution proceedings in E.P.No.1 of 2025 in R.C.O.P.No.15 of 2014 and E.P.No.32 of 2024 in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2014 and to dispose the same within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Nandakumar In both Petitions

¶12

- - - - COMMON ORDER

¶13

These petitions have been filed seeking a direction to the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge (Rent Controlling Authority) Dindigul, to expedite the execution proceedings in E.P.No.1 of 2025 in R.C.O.P.No.15 of 2014 and E.P.No.32 of 2024 in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2014 and to dispose of the same within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶14

1/5

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)Nos.1495 & 1496 of 2025

¶17

Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against the respondent,

¶18

notice to the respondent is dispensed with.

¶19

The petitioner herein has filed a petition against the respondent before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge (Rent Controlling Authority) Dindigul in R.C.O.P.No.15 of 2014, seeking fixation of fair rent, a direction to the respondent to pay the rent as fixed by the Court from the date of filing the petition until the date of vacating the premises, and costs of the petition. The petitioner herein has filed another petition in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2014 against the respondent before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge (Rent Controlling Authority) Dindigul in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2014 seeking eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent, demolition of the building on the ground that it is in a dilapidated condition, and costs of the petition. The abovementioned petitions were allowed on 28.06.2023 by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge (Rent Controlling Authority), Dindigul, directing the respondent to pay the rent as fixed by the lower Court and to vacate the premises within a period of three months Thereafter, the petitioner herein filed Execution Petitions in E.P.No.1 of 2025 in R.C.O.P.No.15 of 2014 and E.P.No. 32 of 2024 in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2014 before the learned Principal District and Sessions Court (Rent Controlling Authority), Dindigul. However, the same have not been disposed of till date. Hence, he filed the present Civil Revision Petitions.

¶20

2/5

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)Nos.1495 & 1496 of 2025

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a landlord and the respondent is a tenant. Since the respondent has neither paid the rent regularly nor vacated the premises as directed by the Rent Controlling Authority, the petitioner filed Execution Petitions in E.P.No.1 of 2025 in R.C.O.P.No.15 of 2014 and E.P.No.32 of 2024 in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2014 before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, (Rent Controlling Authority), Dindigul. However, the same have not been disposed of till date.

¶24

Considering the prayer sought for by the petitioner, the learned

¶25

Principal District and Sessions Judge (Rent Controlling Authority) Dindigul, is directed to conclude the proceedings in E.P.No.1 of 2025 in R.C.O.P.No.15 of 2014 and E.P.No.32 of 2024 in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2014 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

Accordingly, these Civil Revision Petitions stand disposed of. No

¶27

costs.

¶28

02.06.2025

¶29

Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No TSG

¶30

3/5

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)Nos.1495 & 1496 of 2025

¶33

¶34

1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge (Rent Controlling Authority) Dindigul

¶35

The Section Officer, VR Section,

¶36

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶37

4/5

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)Nos.1495 & 1496 of 2025

¶40

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

¶41

TSG

¶42

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)Nos.1495 & 1496 of 2025

¶43

02.06.2025

¶44

5/5

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Thanikachalam Alias Thanikachala Perumal v. Ponram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thanikachalam Alias Thanikachala Perumal v. Ponram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Mohan Vs R.Arivalagan

Tvl Kajah Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner (Inspection) (St Iu)

Suyambulingam Vs The Junior Engineer

S.Siva Kumar Vs P.Gino Paul

T. Muppidathi Muthu Vs a. Kuthalingam

S.Shanthini Vs The Muthukummal Village Panchayat