Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No.587 of 2022 has been preferred to set aside the order passed by the learned XVI Small Causes Court, Chennai in M.P.No.1 of 2021 in RLTOP No.420 of 2020 dated 31.01.2022.

2. The Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No.1937 of 2022 has been preferred to set aside the order and decree passed in RLTOP SR.No.694 of 2022 dated 18.04.2022, on the file of the X Small Causes Court, Chennai and consequently, direct the Rent Court to number the RLTOP and decide the same on merits.

3. Heard Mr.Anirudh Krishnan and Mr.M.Sunil Kumar, learned counsels for the petitioners in both Civil Revision Petitions and Mr.M.L.Ganesh, learned counsel for the respondent in C.R.P.No.587 of 2022 and also perused the materials placed on record.

4. The short facts of the case in C.R.P.No.587 of 2022 are as follows:

The revision petitioner claims himself as a tenant under the respondent/landlord. The respondent landlord filed an eviction petition in https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.Nos.587 & 1937 of 2022 RLTOP.No.420 of 2020, for recovery of possession under the new Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (Act 42 of 2017 as amended by Act 39 of 2018). During the pendency of the said petition, a miscellaneous petition was filed by the petitioner herein in M.P.No.1 of 2021, seeking to dismiss the eviction petition as not maintainable, in view of the repugnancy between Section 5(3) of the Act (Act 42 of 2017) and Section 116 of Transfer of Property Act (Act 4 of 1882). The said petition was dismissed by the Rent Controller. Aggrieved over that, the tenant has filed this Civil Revision Petition.

8. The short facts of the case in C.R.P.No.1937 of 2022 are as follows:

The revision petitioner/landlord is a society and it is being represented by its honorary Secretary. The petitioner and one Sangvi entered into a lease agreement on 25.05.1968 for 55 years in respect of ‘B’ schedule of the agreement and it was registered lease agreement and it was registered on https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.Nos.587 & 1937 of 2022 14.06.1968 at the Sub- Registrar office, Triplicane. The subject matter of the above lease was subsequently assigned by Sangvi in favour of the respondents 1 and 2 and respondents 3 to 11 claim tenancy rights under the respondents 1 and 2. Since the building is in a dilapidated condition, the landlord has filed a petition for eviction in RLTOP.SR.No.694 of 2022 under Section 21(2) (e) of the Act. The said petition was rejected at the threshold on the observation that the tenancy agreement was not registered with the Rent Authority as required under Section 4(3) of the Act. Aggrieved over that, this Civil Revision Petition has been preferred.
(ii) C.R.P.No.1937 of 2022 is partly allowed in terms of the observation rendered under paragraph Nos. 59 and 60 and the order and decree of the learned Rent Controller/ X Small Cause Judge, Chennai passed in RLTOP SR.No.694 of 2022 dated 18.04.2022 is set aside and the unnumbered Petition filed in RLTOP SR.No.694 of 2022 is ordered to be returned with a direction to represent it after complying of the registration formalities under Section 4(3) of the New Act in accordance with Rule 4. No costs. As observed already the revision petitioner is at liberty to file his Application for registration under Section 4(3) along with the petition to condone the delay in filing the Application under Section 4(3). For the sake of convenience paragraph Nos.