Shevvapet Sowrashtra Sangam vs Saroja

M. Duraiswamy, J.—Challenging the judgment and decree passed in RCA No. 7/2004 on the file of Rent Control Appellate Authority (Principal Sub Judge, Salem), reversing the order passed in RCOP No. 26/97 (First Additional District Munsif, Salem), the Shevvapet Sowrashtra Sangam, who claim to be the land lord of the premises, have filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

The petitioner Sangam has filed a petition in RCOP No. 26/97 for fixation of fair rent. According to the petitioner, the contractual rent was Rs. 125/-. The building was leased out for residential purpose. The petitioner claimed a sum of Rs. 3,000/- as fair rent.

The respondent/tenant filed her counter stating that her father became the tenant under one Sowrashtra Valibar Sangam and after the death of her father, she became the tenant in respect of the property under the said Valibar Sangam. The respondent disputed the title of the petitioner Sangam and stating that there is no relationship of landlord-tenant between the petitioner and the respondent.

Before the Rent Controller, on the side of the petitioner Sangam, two witnesses were examined and two documents were marked as Exs. A.1 and A.2. On the side of the respondent R.W.1 was examined and two documents were marked as Exs. B.1 and B.2. Advocate Commissioner''s report was marked as Ex. C.1.

The Rent Controller, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence let in, fixed the fair rent at Rs. 1,800/- per month. Aggrieved over the fixation of fair rent, fixed by the Rent Controller, the tenant preferred an appeal in R.C.A No. 7 of 2004 on the file of Rent Control Appellate Authority/Principal Sub Judge, Salem and the Rent Control Appellate Authority set aside the order passed in R.C.O.P. No. 26 of 1997 finding that the petitioner Sangam is not the owner of the property and therefore, the Rent Control Original Petition is not maintainable. Aggrieved over the judgment and decree, passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, the Sowrashtra Sangam has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

Heard Mr.S. Kalyanaraman, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Kumarasamy, the learned counsel for the respondent.

The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that earlier, the tenant filed an Original Petition in RCOP No. 83/1990 on the file of Additional District Munsif Court, Salem under Sec.9 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, for depositing the rent into the Court. The said Rent Control Original Petition was filed as against the Petitioner Sowrashtra Sangam as well as the Sowrashtra Valibar Sangam.

The Rent Controller allowed the Original Petition in RCOP No. 83/1990 and permitted the tenant to deposit the rent into the Court. Thereafter, the Sowrashtra Valibar Sangam preferred an appeal in RCA No. 88/92 on the file of Rent Control Appellate Authority/Principal Sub Judge, Salem and the Rent Control Appellate Authority reversed the findings of the Rent Controller and dismissed the Original Petition in RCOP No. 83/1990, against which, the respondent/tenant preferred a Civil Revision Petition in CRP No. 1600 of 1995 before this Court and this Court, by Order dated 22.3.1999 set aside the order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority and allowed the revision. While allowing the Civil Revision Petition, this Court observed as follows:

"However, on the facts available in this case, I am of the opinion that it may not be really necessary for the tenant to deposit the rent into court. The facts disclose that Sowrashtra Valibar Sangam has become defunct and Sowrashtra Sangam is the authority, which is entitled to collect the rent. Hence the revision petitioner/tenant is directed to pay the entire arrears of rent, if any, as on date directly to Sowrashtra Sangam on or before 15.4.1999. Mr. R. Sekar, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would state that there are no arrears as on date and Sowrashtra Sangam has been receiving the rent from the revision petitioner, under protest. If there are no arrears of rent at all, then the tenant is directed to pay the rent for the month of March 1999 directly to Sowrashtra Sangam mon or before 10.4.99 and continue to pay the future rent commencing from April 1999 likewise on or before the 10th of the succeeding month."

From the above, it is clear that this Court has given a finding that the Sowrashtra Valibar Sangam has become defunct and Sowrashtra Sangam is the authority, which is entitled to collect the rent. Further, this Court directed the respondent/tenant to pay the entire arrears of rent, if any, as on date, directly to the Sowrashtra Sangam, which is the petitioner herein.

Further, a representation was also made before this Court on behalf of the tenant that the Sowrashtra Sangam has been receiving the rent from the respondent under protest. When there is a clear finding given by this Court in the earlier Civil Revision Petition that the Sowrashtra Valibar Sangam has become defunct and Sowrashtra Sangam is the authority, which is entitled to collect the rent and when the said finding has not been challenged by the tenant, the said finding has become final. Inspite of this finding, the Rent Control Appellate Authority has erroneously came to the conclusion that the petitioner Sangam is not the landlord in respect of the property and therefore, the Original Petition, filed by the said Sangam, for fixation of fair rent, is not maintainable. The finding of the Rent Control Appellate Authority is erroneous for the reason that it has totally ignored the findings given by this Court in the Civil Revision Petition in CRP No. 1600 of 1995.

In view of the findings given by this Court in the Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P. No. 1600 of 1995, I am of the considered view that the petitioner Sangam is entitled to collect the rent from the respondent/tenant. The Rent Control Appellate Authority has not gone into the merits of the matter and the fixation of fair rent by the Rent controller.

In these circumstances, the judgment and decree passed in RCA No. 7/2004 are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Principal Sub Judge, Salem for fresh consideration with regard to the fixation of fair rent.

Since this Court has come to the conclusion that the petitioner Sangam is entitled to collect the rent from the respondent/tenant, the Rent Control Appellate Authority need not go into this aspect i.e., with regard to the title of the property once again and the Rent Control Appellate Authority shall only decide the correctness of the order passed by the Rent Controller in R.C.O.P. No. 26 of 1997 with regard to fixation of fair rent.

The Rent Control Appellate Authority/Principal Sub Judge, Salem is directed to dispose of the appeal in RCA No. 7 of 2004, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

With these observations, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected MP is closed.