J MURALI Vs. M SIVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Revision Petitioner herein has come forward with this Civil Revision Petition, challenging the order dated 06.10.2012 made in I.A.No.442/2012 in O.S.No.288 of 2009 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Alandur.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner herein is the owner of the property at Door No.315/13, Yadaval Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. It is an admitted fact that Bhavani Shankar was a tenant under the Revision Petitioner herein in the front portion of the ground and first floors, whereas, the respondent herein was also a tenant under the revision petitioner herein in the rear portion of the ground floor. He further submitted that the plaintiff/revision peititoner herein filed R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2003 for evicting Bhavani Shankar, which was allowed and he took possession on 26.04.2007. The revision petitioner herein also filed an eviction proceedings against the respondent herein in R.C.O.P.No.56 of 2001 for willful default in payment of rent and he also filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, wherein, eviction order was passed on 24.04.2009, against which, the respondent herein filed R.C.A.Nos.40 and 41 of 2009, which were dismissed on 20.10.2009. Aggrieved against the same, the respondent herein filed revision petitions before this Court in C.R.P.Nos.1181 and 1182 of 2011, which were also dismissed on 31.03.2011. Since the respondent herein attempted to interfere with the possession of the subject matter of the property in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2003, the revision petitioner herein filed a suit in O.S.No.288 of 2009 for injunction, wherein, interim injunction was granted and subsequently, it was made absolute on 12.03.2010. Since the respondent willfully disobeyed the order of the Court and trespassed into the subject matter of the property in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2003, i.e. the subject matter of the suit, the revision petitioner filed a contempt application under Order 39 Rule 2A of C.P.C. for the following relief:

(3.) In the said appliction, even though notice was issued to the defendant/respondent herein, he did not appear before the trial court. The trial Court, after examining P.W.1 and Exs.P1 to P3, has held that the defendant/respondent herein willfully disobeyed the order of the Court, hence, he was directed to be detained in civil Prison for a term not exceeding three months. But, the application was disallowed with regard to restoration of the possession, against which, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.