LAWS(MAD)-2021-10-102

ARULMIGHU SUNDARA VINAYAGAR TEMPLE Vs. SAMPOORNAMMAL

Decided On October 05, 2021
Arulmighu Sundara Vinayagar Temple Appellant
V/S
SAMPOORNAMMAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, Arulmigu Sundara Vinayagar Temple represented by its Managing Trustee is the plaintiff in O.S.No.77 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Walajapet.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the trial court and at appropriate places, their ranking in the present appeal would also be indicated.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff in nutshell is as follows: The suit property absolutely belongs to the plaintiff temple. Originally one Duraisamy Naidu, husband of the first defendant and father of the defendants 2 to 5 was a tenant in the suit property under the plaintiff on a monthly rent of Rs.20.00. After the demise of Duraisamy Naidu, the first defendant was recognized as the tenant by the plaintiff and she had not only been residing in the suit property but also running a fire wood shop. Even during the lifetime of Duraisamy Naidu, he did not pay the rents regularly to the plaintiff and he was a chronic defaulter. The rent used to be paid by him only after filing suits for recovery of the arrears of rents and one such suit in O.S.No.550 of 1983 was filed before the District Munsif, Walajapet. The said suit was also decreed, as is seen from a certified copy of the decree Ex.A1. Subsequently, the rents due to the plaintiff were not paid by the defendants and therefore, the plaintiff issued a legal notice dtd. 4/4/2002, a copy of which is marked as Ex.A2, terminating the tenancy of the defendants. The first defendant sent a reply notice dtd. 29/4/2002 (Ex.A3), which according to the plaintiff contained false allegations. Therefore, the plaintiff filed a suit for ejectment against the defendants in O.S.No.77 of 2002.