V. DAKSHINAMURTHY Vs. P.A. RANGANAYAKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondent. This Civil Revision has been preferred by the petitioner/tenant, stating that eviction was ordered against the petitioner/ tenant, by order and decretal order, dated 21.06.2010 made in R.C.O.P. No. 1 of 2009 on the file of the Rent Controller/District Munsif Court, Sholinghur, that was confirmed by Judgment and Decree, dated 09.11.2011 passed in R.C.A. No. 9 of 2010 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Subordinate Judge, Ranipet.

(2.) Mr. A. Venkatesan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to page number 51 of the impugned order, whereby the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority had directed the petitioner/tenant to vacate and deliver vacant possession of petition mentioned property to the respondent/landlady within two months from the date of the Judgment.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that before the expiry of the time limit given by the Court below on 07.12.2011 itself, the petitioner/tenant was forcibly evicted by the respondent/landlady with the help of police. In support of his contention, learned counsel drew the attention of this Court to the copy of the complaint given by the petitioner before the Inspector of Police, Sholingur, Vellore District. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner/tenant was forcibly evicted by the respondent, therefore, he is entitled to get redelivery and restoration of possession. In support of his contention, learned counsel for petitioner/tenant relied on the following decisions: