M. EASWARAN Vs. D. HARIHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) A summation and summarisation of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.1177 of 2012, would run thus:

(3.) REGARDING C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.1501 of 2012, which is focussed as against the RCOP No.41 of 2012 filed by the landlord for evicting the tenant on his default in paying rent pending the earlier RCOP No.60 of 2008, the revision petitioner would contend that such subsequent filing of RCOP is nothing but an abuse of the process of Court warranting quashment by invoking Article 227 of the Indian Constitution. I would like to once again refer to the same precedent cited supra and also the provisions of the Rent Control Act. If at all the tenant is aggrieved, he should approach only the appellate forum under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, only. However, in respect of the plea of the tenant regarding the maintainability of RCOP No.41 of 2012 is concerned, it is for him to file necessary application before the Rent Controller and seek remedy.