Kasiram Paper Agencies vs R.V. Sowlee

M. Duraiswamy, J.—The above Civil Revision Petition arises against the fair and decretal order passed in R.C.A. No. 8 of 2008 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Principal Subordinate Court, Madurai, confirming the fair and decretal order passed in R.C.O.P. No. 341 of 1998, on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai.

The tenants are the petitioners and the respondents are the landlords. The respondents filed R.C.O.P. No. 8 of 2008 for eviction on the ground of willful default. It is the case of the respondents that the petition property was leased out to the revision petitioners on a monthly rent of Rs. 3,300/- for commercial purpose. The petitioners committed default in paying the monthly rent from 01.05.1998 to 31.08.1998. Inspite of repeated demands, the petitioners failed and neglected to pay the arrears to the landlords. In these circumstances, the respondents filed a original petition in R.C.O.P. No. 341 of 1998 for eviction. The tenants contended that there was no willful default on their part and that on 11.11.1998, they sent a demand draft to the landlords towards the arrears of the rent, hence there is no willful default as alleged by the petitioners. The Rent Controller after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidences of both parties, ordered eviction finding that the tenants had committed willful default in paying the monthly rent.

Aggrieved over the same, the tenants preferred an appeal in R.C.A. No. 8 of 2008 and the Rent Control Appellate Authority also confirmed the order of eviction granted by the Rent Controller. Against which, the tenants have filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

Heard Mr. K. Sreekumaran Nair, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents.

On a careful consideration of the materials available on record and the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on either side, it could be seen that the landlords contended that the tenants committed default in paying the monthly rent from June 1998 to August 1988. According to the tenants, the rent for the said four months'' period was paid to the landlords in the month of December 1998. R.W. 1 also admitted that the rent from June 1998 to August 1998 was paid to the landlords only in the month of December 1998. When the agreement between the parties was to pay the monthly rent on the every succeeding month, the payment of four months'' rent at once itself would establish that there was default on the part of the tenants. Further the rent for the month of May 1998 was paid in the month of November 1998. The landlords filed R.C.O.P. for fixation of fair rent and the Rent Controller as well as the Rent Control Appellate Authority enhanced the rent to Rs. 8,700/- from Rs. 3,300/-.

Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents/landlords submitted that as on today, if the arrears is calculated on the fair rent fixed by the Courts below, the arrears comes to Rs. 9,72,000/-

Mr. K. Sreekumaran Nair, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the order fixing the fair rent has not become final. In any event, the learned Counsel submitted the petitioners are willing to pay the enhanced rent of Rs. 8,700/- till he vacates the premises from this date.

It is not in dispute that the petition property situates in the heart of the Madurai city near the Meenakshi Amman temple. The property was leased out for non-residential purpose and that the tenants are running their paper agency. When the documents produced before the Courts below as well as the evidence of R.W. 1 clearly established the default in paying the rent and that inspite of repeated demands, the tenants failed to pay the monthly rent regularly. It would establish that the default committed by the tenants amounts to willful default as rightly found by the Courts below. The Courts below concurrently found that the tenants had committed willful default and ordered eviction. In these circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Courts below. The fair and decretal orders passed by the Courts below are confirmed.

Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. Consequently the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Mr. K. Sreekumaran Nair, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the tenants may be granted 9 months'' time to vacate and hand over the vacant possession to the landlords, for which Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents/landlords has no objection.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Counsel on either side, the revision petitioners/tenants are granted 9 months'' time to vacate and hand over the vacant possession of the petition property to the respondent without driving them to initiate the execution proceedings, on condition that the petitioners/tenants shall file an affidavit of undertaking before the Registry on or before 18.12.2014, failing which the time granted by this Court shall stand cancelled. The tenants shall pay the rent at the rate of Rs. 8,700/- from this day to the date of vacating the premises. It is open to the respondents/landlords to initiate appropriate proceedings for recovering the arrears of rent from the tenants.

Note : Issue order copy on 17.12.2014