P.V.NATESAN Vs. MOHAMMED ISMAIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both the counsel. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this Civil Revision Petition would run thus:

(2.) CHALLENGING and impugning the orders of both the fora below, this Civil Revision Petition has been focussed on various grounds.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the landlord, in a bid to slap down and torpedo the arguments put forth and set forth on the side of the tenant, would put forth his arguments which could pithily and precisely be set out thus: The conduct of the tenant no doubt should be taken note of. In the counter, he would contend as though the advance of Rs.15,000.00 was paid in the presence of Jamad Leader, whereas, while deposing before the Court, he would depose as though the said advance was paid in the presence of the tenant's wife. The contention on the side of the tenant that till date arrears have been paid even by phantasmagorical thoughts cannot be visualised and upheld for the reason that the landlord and tenant have been at loggerheads, and it is quite unbelievable that the tenant might have paid the arrears of rent to the landlord till date personally. The landlord admittedly was in the habit of issuing the rent receipts on receipt of monthly rent. For the said 11 months, if at all the tenant had paid any rent, he should have produced rent receipts with the signature of the landlord, but no such receipts were produced. As such, both the Courts rejected the plea of the tenant and ordered eviction.