WOMEN AND CHILDREN FOUNDATION LTD Vs. THANALETCHUMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TENANT is the revision petitioner.

(2.) RESPONDENT /landlord filed the petition for eviction on the ground of wilful default and for own occupation. The learned Rent Controller, on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence, held that the revision petitioner/tenant committed wilful default in payment of rent and the requirement of the landlord is also bona fide and ordered eviction. The learned Rent Control Appellate Authority confirmed the order of eviction on the ground of wilful default and rejected the claim of the landlord for owner's occupation. Aggrieved by the same, this revision is filed.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent/landlord submitted that though in the agreement, the rent was mentioned as Rs.65,000/= per month, thereafter, the tenant has taken possession of one room in the upstairs and agreed to pay Rs.35,000/= towards that room and therefore, the rent was fixed at Rs.1,00,000/= per month and the tenant also did not produce the particulars of income tax paid to enable the landlord to claim exemption and the tenant was paying the rent after deducting the income tax and even assuming that the tenant has paid income tax, the tenant has committed wilful default in payment of rent from November 2006 and even after the issuance of lawyer's notice, the revision petitioner has not paid the rent and the revision petitioner paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/= by way of cheque towards arrears of rent and that was also returned dishonoured and even during the pendency of the eviction proceedings, the revision petitioner was not regular in paying the rent and therefore, the revision petitioner has committed wilful default and therefore, the concurrent findings of fact regarding the wilful default need not be interfered with in the revision. He further submitted that the respondent produced the power of attorney before the court below and obtained the permission from the court and thereafter, the case was numbered and also filed the xerox copies of the power of attorney and the affidavit filed before the learned Rent Controller for accepting the same and the orders passed thereon in the typed set of papers filed on 24.11.2011 and submitted that the initiation of proceedings by the power agent is proper and the revision petitioner is also aware of the same and therefore, he has not raised the objection before the court below and now, it is not open to him to raise the plea in this revision.