AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pratap Singh, J.—This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order passed in M.P. No. 123 of 1987 in P. No. 2335/1981 on the file
of the Revenue Court, Mayiladulhurai. Short facts are:- The respondent filed the petition for eviction on the ground of arrears of rent in P. No.
2335 of 1981. While so, the Revision Petitioner has filed M.P. No. 123/1987 praying to revise the order passed earlier by the erstwhile Revenue
Court, Mayiladuthurai in its Proceedings No. 2335/81 dated 22.2.1983 on the ground that it was based on the ratio of 60:40 that was prevalent
prior to the Amendment Act 17/80. It is his further case that the earlier interim order may be revised with reference to Act 17/80 on the basis of
75:25. His claim has been rejected by the Revenue Court. Aggrieved by the same this Revision Petition is filed.
I have heard Mr. Rajarathinam. Learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Mr. Kunchitapatham, Learned Counsel appearing for
the respondent and I have carefully considered the submissions made by the Learned Counsels. The Revenue Court had dismissed the petition on
the ground that the petitioner cannot raise this point in a petition filed by the landlord for eviction on the ground of arrears of rent and that he can
claim the fixation of rent as per the new Act on the ratio of 75:25 only by way of separate petition. The ambit and scope of the main petition is to
find out whether there was arrears of rent as has been already fixed by the Revenue Court. In that petition, the question of revision of the rent fixed
on an earlier occasion, would not at all arise. That is beyond the scope of the main petition. As such, the Revenue Court has rightly rejected this
contention and consequently dismissed the petition. I find absolutely no ground to interfere with the same. Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition
fails and shall stand dismissed. No costs.