Disposed¶31

Muthuramalingam v. Meena

Madras HC9 Jan 2025CRP(MD)/42/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tamil Nadu rent control revision; Section 11(4) interim arrears direction; Section 11(3) quantum adjudication contention rejected; wilful default eviction RCOP.No.215 of 2016; RCA.No.40 of 2022 dismissed; arrears not deposited; disposal with two-instalment payment direction and eviction deadline 10.03.2025; Article 227; Madurai Bench.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition disposed of without costs; petitioner directed to pay arrears of rent within three months in two equal instalments, failing which eviction from the suit premises on or before 10.03.2025; respondent at liberty to proceed with the decree passed by the Court below; connected Miscellaneous Petition (CMP(MD).No. 236 of 2025) closed. ¶31

Muthuramalingam Vs Meena — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court below erroneously allowed the landlord's application under Section 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act without adjudicating the quantum of rent described under Section 11(3) of that Act.

¶25

Court's answer

On perusal of the records, the petitioner nowhere disputed the quantum of rent; therefore the arrears directed under the Section 11(4) order had to be paid by the petitioner.

¶27

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner did not deposit the arrears of rent as per the direction of the Court below; therefore the present Civil Revision Petition is devoid of merits.

¶27

Key takeaways

The petitioner was directed to pay the arrears of rent within three months from receipt of a copy of the order in two equal instalments, failing which he is to be evicted from the suit premises on or before 10.03.2025; the respondent was left at liberty to take further action to proceed with the decree passed by the Court below.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi J.: Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution by the tenant Muthuramalingam against the fair and decreetal order dated 16.07.2023 in RCA.No.40 of 2022 (Rent Control Appellate Authority, Principal Subordinate Judge, Madurai) and the order dated 30.09.2022 in I.A.No.69 of 2021 in RCOP.No.215 of 2016 (Additional Rent Controller, Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town). The landlord Meena had sought eviction for wilful default in RCOP.No.215 of 2016 and, pending it, obtained a Section 11(4) Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act direction for payment of rent arrears from May 2013 to February 2021; the tenant's appeal against that direction was dismissed. Counsel for the tenant contended the Section 11(4) application was allowed without adjudicating the quantum of rent under Section 11(3). The Court found the petitioner had nowhere disputed the quantum of rent and had not deposited the arrears as directed by the Court below, held the revision devoid of merits, and disposed of it, directing payment of arrears within three months in two equal instalments, failing which eviction on or before 10.03.2025, leaving the respondent free to proceed with the decree; no costs; connected CMP(MD).No. 236 of 2025 closed.

¶1

CRP(MD).No.42 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.01.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI

¶6

C.R.P(MD)No.42 of 2025 and CMP(MD).No. 236 of 2025

Muthuramalingam

: Petitioner

Vs.

Meena

: Respondent

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decreetal order, dated 16.07.2023 passed in RCA.No.40 of 2022 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Principal Subordinate Judge, Madurai and the order, dated 30.09.2022 in I.A.No.69 of 2021 in RCOP.No.215 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Rent Controller (Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.N. Vallinayagam For respondent : Mr.R. Ramadurai

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The present Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and

¶16

1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

CRP(MD).No.42 of 2025

¶18

decreetal order, dated 16.07.2023 made in R.C.A.No.40 of 2022 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Principal Subordinate Judge, Madurai and the order, dated 30.09.2022 made in I.A.No.69 of 2021 in RCOP.No.215 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Rent Controller (Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town.

¶19

By the consent of both parties, this Civil Revision Petition is

¶20

taken up for final disposal in the admission stage itself.

¶21

According to the revision petitioner he is a tenant in the disputed premises and the respondent is a landlord. The respondent / landlord has filed RCOP.No.215 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Rent Controller / Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town for eviction on the ground of wilful default. Pending the said RCOP, the respondent / landlord filed an application in I.A.No.69 of 2021 under Section 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, to direct the petitioner herein to pay all the arrears of the rent from May 2013 to till February 2021 and the same was allowed. Against which, the appeal was preferred by the petitioner in RCA.No.40 of 2022 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority / Principal Subordinate Judge, Madurai and the said

¶22

2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

CRP(MD).No.42 of 2025

¶24

RCA was also dismissed. Challenging the same, the present revision is filed by the revision petitioner / tenant.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that without adjudicating the quantum of rent described under Section 11(3) of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, the Court below erroneously allowed the application filed by the respondent under Section 11(4) of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, which requires consideration by this Court.

¶26

Heard on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶27

On perusal of the records, it is seen that nowhere the petitioner has disputed the quantum of rent and therefore, the said amount has to be paid by the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner has not deposited the arrears of rent as per the direction of the Court below. Therefore, the present revision is devoid of merits. However, the petitioner is directed to pay the arrears of rent within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in two equal installments, failing which, the petitioner is directed to be evicted from the suit premises on or before

¶28

3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

CRP(MD).No.42 of 2025

¶30

10.03.2025. The respondent is at liberty to take further action to proceed with the decree passed by the Court below.

¶31