D. THIRUVENGADAM Vs. THIRUVANNAMALAI KUNDRAKUDI ATHEENAM,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 1stdefendant in the suit is the appellant in S.A.No.1006 of 2014. The appellants 2 to 4 before the lower Appellate Court are the appellants in S.A.No.568 of 2014.

(2.) The 1st respondent/plaintiff filed a suit seeking for the relief of a direction to direct the defendants to vacate and handover the vacant possession of the suit property. The case of the plaintiff is that they are the owners of the land measuring about 3010 Sq.ft., which is more fully described in the suit schedule. According to the plaintiff, the suit schedule property was originally leased out to the father of the 1st defendant through a lease agreement dtd. 16/10/1954 (Ex.A5). It is stated that the suit property was supposed to be maintained as a cattle shed and no permanent structure was permitted to be put up in the suit property. Inspite of such a restriction, the father of the 1st defendant proceeded to put up a construction and aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff filed O.S.No.2645 of 1963 for the relief of permanent injunction and the said suit was decreed by a judgment and decree dtd. 25/10/1966. An appeal was preferred in A.S. No.24 of 1966 and during the pendency of the appeal, there was a compromise and the father of the 1st defendant agreed to pay a sum of Rs.100.00 per month as rent from 25/10/1966 onwards.

(3.) The further case of the plaintiff is that after the demise of the original tenant, the 1st defendant continued to occupy the property. However, he was not regular in paying the rent and as a result of the same, he accumulated huge arrears. The plaintiff also realised that a very low rent has been fixed and hence, enhanced the rent to Rs.500.00 per month. This once again became a subject matter of challenge before the Civil Court.