K. SUBRAMANIAM Vs. KRISHNA MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the heirs of a lessee seeking reversal of a revisional judgment and order dtd. 22/6/2021 impugned order of the High Court of Judicature at Madras High Court The impugned order affirmed an appellate order of eviction dtd. 25/2/2020 which, in turn, had reversed the original order of dismissal of the eviction petition dtd. 6/2/2019.

(2.) The basic facts giving rise to the impugned order are not in dispute. To the extent germane for disposal of the present appeal, the same are adverted to in brief hereunder:

(3.) Mr. Jaideep Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, contended that the eviction petition as originally filed was untenable. According to him, no notice had been issued by M/s. Krishna prior to the filing of RCOP No.44 of 2005, wherein wilful default in payment of rent was alleged on the ground that the monthly rent was Rs.48,000.00 p.m., whereas the lessee consistently asserted that the rent was Rs.33,000.00 p.m. He further contended that until disposal of CRP (NPD) No.2511 of 2008, no notice was ever served calling upon the lessee to pay arrears based on fixation of Rs.2,43,600.00 p.m. as the fair rent by the Rent Controller with effect from 1/2/2005, covering the period up to 30/6/2007. He invited our attention to the letter dtd. 5/2/2013 of M/s. Krishna, wherein it acknowledged that the arrears had been received at the rate of Rs.2,37,500.00 p.m., i.e., the fair rent as modified by the High Court on 9/9/2011. In such circumstances, it was urged that the belated amendment in RCOP No.134 of 2007, filed in the year 2017 after the demise of the lessee, impleading the present appellants and resurrecting the ground of wilful default for the very same arrears, was nothing but an afterthought and liable to be rejected.