ARULMIGHU KABALEESWARAR TEMPLE Vs. SUBBULAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petition is filed challenging the judgment and decree in C.M.A.No.19 of 1994 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam dated 7.9.1995 confirming the judgment and decree dated 23.4.1993 in O.P.No.1 of 1993 on the file of the District Munsif, Tiruvarur.

(2.) The revision petitioner is the landlord/appellant in appeal before the Subordinate Judge. The respondent is the tenant/respondent in the said proceedings and filed the petition under Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act in the District Munsif Court, Tiruvarur for a direction to the landlord to sell the site wherein he has constructed the building. On the contrary, the revision petitioner/landlord resisted the petition by filing the counter. After analysing the evidence both oral and documentary adduced by both sides and upon hearing the arguments advanced by the counsel, the learned District Munsif allowed the petition directing respondent herein to deposit a sum of Rs.45,100/- within three months from the date of the order towards the cost of 451 sq.ft. in the demised property upon which the respondent has put up the super structure as tenant under the petitioner. The petitioner herein filed the appeal before the Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam and after perusing the records and hearing both sides, the learned Subordinate Judge confirmed the order passed by the learned District Munsif and dismissed the appeal accordingly. Hence the revision.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has argued at the outset that the respondent is not entitled to the benefits under the provision of the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 (as amended by Tamil Nadu Act 2 of 1996) in view of the amendment to the proviso by inserting proviso (f) to sub-Section (3) of Section 1 which came into force from 5.1.1996. The said proviso runs as under:-