M ANITHA DEVI Vs. A GOVINDARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the owner and landlady of the petition premises, filed RCOP.No.19 of 2001 on the file of the Rent Controller (District Munsif Court), Tiruvarur seeking eviction of the respondent on the ground that he has committed wilful default in payment of rents and that the petition premises is required for additional accommodation. Learned Rent Controller allowed the eviction petition on the ground that the respondent has committed wilful default in payment of rents, while rejecting the claim of the petitioner under Section 10(3)(c) of the Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act.

(2.) BEING aggrieved by that, the respondent herein preferred an appeal in RCA.No.3 of 2004 before the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Subordinate Court), Tiruvaur. The Rent Control Appellate Authrority allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein. BEING aggrieved by that, the petitioner is before this Court.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner further submitted that it was also the case of the respondent that as the vendor of the petitioner had informed him that he had sold the property to the petitioner herein, he was paying the rent from May 1997 upto October 1999. Since the petitioner refused to receive the rent from November 1999, the respondent filed a petition under Section 8(5) of the said Act in RCOP.NO.8 of 2000. That petition was ordered and accordingly, he was depositing the rent into the Court. But, in RCOP.NO.8 of 2000, the alleged default was not gone into. It was further contended by the learned counsel for the respondent that since the sale deed in favour of the petitioner had been registered only on 28.7.1999, the petitioner cannot claim that she had purchased the property in May 1997.