Madras High Court
Murugesan vs Gnanasekaran on 20 August, 2015
Author: P.Devadass
Bench: P.Devadass
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.08.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DEVADASS
C.R.P.(MD) No.1695 of 2015
and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2015
Murugesan ... Petitioner/Tenant
-vs-
Gnanasekaran ... Respondent/Landlord
PRAYER
Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
praying to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.64 of 2015 in R.C.O.P.No.92
of 2013, on the file of the Rent Controller (Principal District Munsif),
Trichy dated 23.06.2015.
!For Petitioner : Mr.R.Mohanasundaram
^For Respondent : Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan
:ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition arises out of an order passed in I.A.No.64 of 2015 in R.C.O.P.No.92 of 2013, on the file of the Rent Controller (Principal District Munsif), Trichy dated 23.06.2015.
2.The respondent/landlord is seeking eviction of the petitioner/tenant on the ground of wilful default in paying rent for his occupation/owner's occupation. The R.C.O.P. has become part-heard. Petitioner's evidence is over. Respondent's evidence is going on. The tenant/revision petitioner filed I.A.No.64 of 2015 to send for certain records in O.S.No.637 of 2013, which has been filed on the ground that certain relevant documents are available with the said suit. The suit was dismissed for default. These documents remain to unmarked.
3.The learned Rent Controller appreciated the contentions made in the petition and counter affidavit as well as the scope of R.C.O.P. and came to the conclusion that the documents mentioned therein viz. rental agreement (which has been accepted by the landlord), E.B. Card, commercial tax assessment order, professional tax receipt are not relevant to decide the question in this landlord-tenant dispute. The learned Rent Controller also mentioned that certified copies of the same can be obtained from the Court. The Rent Controller is also of the view that it is to derail the trial of R.C.O.P.
4.The learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterated here also the very same submissions placed before the learned Rent Controller. He also submitted that as the documents are unmarked, certified copies cannot be obtained, but, they are necessary to set up his defence in R.C.O.P.
5.The learned counsel for the respondent/landlord submitted that correct reasons have been given by the Rent Controller and these documents are not at all germane to the point in issue.
6.I have considered the rival submissions, perused the materials on record and the impugned order.
7.Even if a suit is dismissed for default, the records including the documents cannot be thrown out. It will be available in Court record. Any part of the record even marked or unmarked, certified copies of them can be obtained. That is the procedure under Civil Rules of Practice. This is one aspect of the matter.
8.These documents nowhere near the defence raised by the tenant. Eviction is sought for on the ground of willful default and owner's need. It has been contended by the revision petitioner it is motivated, malafide and it is a ruse to throw away the tenants from the building. Though the arguments are attractive, but it is difficult to accept. The reasons are obvious. The reasons given by the learned Rent Controller for dismissing the send for petition is in accordance with law. In the facts and circumstances there is no flaw in the order of the Rent Controller.
9.In the result, this Civil Revision Petitions is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2015 is dismissed.
To
1.The Principal District Judge, Thiruchirappalli.
2.The Rent Controller, (Principal District Munsif), Thiruchirappalli..