| |
CDJ 2026 MHC 2170
|
| Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras |
| Case No : C.R.P. No. 5444 of 2025 & C.M.P. No. 6238 of 2026 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI |
| Parties : Kadiresan Palaniappan alias Tamil Arasan, Rep. by its Proprietor of SN PAPERS, Chennai Versus S. Mohamed Ali & Others |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: T. Jayaramaraj, E. Paulraj, V. Jayakrishna Kumar, Nanchill J Deekshith, R. Aruna Devi, J. Maria Lebaniya Princy, M. Nisha, deepika Jayaramaraj, Advocates. For the Respondents: M/s. Sanjay Rajprohit, Advocates. |
| Date of Judgment : 18-03-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
Landlord & Tenants Act, 2017 - Section (c) & Section (d) -
Comparative Citation:
2026 (1) TLNJ 606,
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Tamil Nadu Regulations of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlord and Tenants Act, 2017
- TNRRRLT Act, 2017
- Section 3 of the Act
- Section (c) and (d)
2. Catch Words:
- Tenancy
- Eviction
- Landlord‑Tenant relationship
- Waqf property
- Registration of tenancy
- Cross‑examination
- Title of ownership
3. Summary:
The petitioner filed a Civil Revision Petition seeking the records of the XIII Small Causes Court, Chennai, and to set aside its order dated 06‑10‑2025 in an eviction proceeding. The petitioner claimed the premises were Waqf property exempt from the Rent Act and that the respondents had falsely asserted ownership, preventing registration of the tenancy. The respondents contended they purchased the property in 2014, received rent, and the trial court correctly dismissed the petition. The revisional court noted that the petitioner, as a tenant, could not challenge the landlord’s title and that the respondents had proved ownership. Consequently, the court found no merit in interfering with the lower court’s order.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed |
| Judgment :- |
|
(Prayer CRP No. 5444 of 2025: To call for the entire records from the Honourable XIII Small Causes Court, Chennai, and to set aside the order in M.P.No.3/2025 in R.L.T.O.P.No.351/2024 dated 06.10.2025 and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
CMP No. 6238 of 2026: To grant stay of all further proceedings in R.L.T.O.P.No.351/2024 and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.)
1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to call for the entire records from the Honourable XIII Small Causes Court, Chennai, and to set aside the order in M.P.No.3/2025 in R.L.T.O.P.No.351/2024 dated 06.10.2025.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein entered into a Tenancy Agreement in the year 2014 with the Respondents for the ground floor at No.50, Anderson Street, Chennai-600 001 for a monthly rent of Rs.6,190/- and paid the advance of Rs.20,000/-. While being so, the Respondents filed the petition for eviction on the ground of non-co-operation for registering the tenancy agreement and the same is pending before the XIII Small Causes Court. Chennai in R.L.T.O.P. No.351 of 2024.
3. It has been further submitted that the respondents have not taken any steps to register the tenancy agreement since the petition premises belongs to the Waqf Board and as per the Rent Act, ie. Tamil Nadu Regulations of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlord and Tenants Act, 2017, under Section (c) and (d), the Waqf property is ousted from the Rent Court, but the respondents filed the petition by falsely stating that the premises are not exempted under Section 3 of the Act. Further, the Administrator General/Official Trustee affixed the notice on the property stating that the property belongs to the AG&OT. Under such circumstances, without proper title, the respondents could not register as prescribed under the TNRRRLT Act, 2017. Under such circumstances, the petitioner filed the application in M.P. No.3 of 2025 in RLTOP No.351 of 2024 seeking to cross examine the respondents in this regard. However, the Trial Court without considering the facts and circumstances of the case, dismissed the application. Hence, he seeks to allow the petitioner to cross examine the respondents.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the respondents are the owners of the petition premises and the respondents have purchased the property in the year 2014 and the petitioner being a tenant has paid rent of Rs.12,380/- on 21.04.2024 finally. Thereafter, he has not paid the rent and challenged the ownership of the petition premises. The Trial Court after considering title deed of the respondents has rightly dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner. Hence, the Revision petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is the Tenant under the respondents from the year 2014 and also paid the rent of Rs.12,380/- to the respondents till 21.08.2024, thereby he admitted the jural relationship of Landlord and Tenant. Whereas the petitioner being the tenant cannot challenge the title of the landlord as to whether the petition property belongs to Wakf Board or AG&OT which is not acceptable. Further, the respondents have proved their title before the Trial Court as they have purchased the property in the year 2014. Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order dated 06.10.2025 passed by the XIII Small Causes Court, Chennai.
7. In the result, the Civil Revision petition is dismissed. No costs.
|
| |
