C SWAMINATHA MUDALIAR SONS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM Vs. S M SINGARAM AND SINNIAH EXECUTOR AND ADMINISTRATOR UNDER THE WILL DEED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above civil revision petition was disposed of by this Court on 19th October, 1981 and the learned counsel for the landlords has filed this memo, seeking for clarification and guidance with reference to the order passed already. Notice was issued to the other side and learned counsel for both parties were heard.

(2.) THE landlords filed the petition for eviction of the tenants on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent and requirement for demolition and reconstruction. During the pendency of the petition, the landlords filed an application in I.A. No. 579 of 1977 under section 11 (4) .of Act XVIII of 1960, for a direction to the tenants to deposit the arrears of rent failing which, for stoppage of all further proceedings and for an order of eviction. THE tenants raised all sorts of contentions, namely, that the petitioners in the eviction petition are not the landlords, that the arrears prior to the period of three years are barred by time and that the will in favour of the landlords by the original landlady has not been probated and that, there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. THE Rent Controller framed five points on the averments and considered all the contentions in I.A. No. 579 of 1977 and recorded his findings in these terms: . THEre is relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and the petitioners in the eviction petition are the landlords entitled to receive rent for the premises. It was also found that a sum of Rs. 37,410 was due as arrears of rent and the Rent Controller directed the tenants to deposit the said sum along with the current arrears within a prescribed time granted, failing which, the eviction petition shall stand allowed. This order was passed on 11th July, 1978. Admittedly these arrears were not paid or deposited by the tenants and the tenants prefered an appeal in C.M.A. No. 246 of 1978 against that order. THE Appellate Authority also considered all the contentions of the parties in an elaborate order, discussed the case-law on the subject and confirmed the order of the Rent Controller directing the tenants to deposit Rs. 37,970 including the subsequent arrears. THE tenants were aggrieved and they filed the above civil revision petition, C.R.P. No. 2981 of 1979 before this Court which also considered all the contentions raised by the tenants, namely, that the petitioners in the eviction petition are not the landlords, that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between them and that, in any event, the landlords cannot file this petition for eviction without probating the will in their favour. THE tenants also contended that they need not pay the time-barred arrears of rent and that, they were liable to pay only three years. rent prior to the filing of the petition. This Court negatived all the contentions of the tenants and dismissed the civil revision petition on 19th October, 1981, after answering all the points.

(3.) AS against this, learned counsel for the tenants would argue that what was disposed of earlier was only the application under section 11 (4) of the Act and not that the merits of the case were considered: Therefore, it is stated that it is open to the tenants to agitate the matter in the petition for eviction which has been revived after the disposal of C.R.P. No. 2981 of 1979. . It is also submitted on behalf of the tenants- that they have since paid the arrears of rent and therefore, they are entitled to contest R.C.O.P. No. 395 of 1977, which according to them is still pending.