K. KHAJA KHAFOOR Vs. C.J. RAMAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant is before this Court challenging the order dated 07.08.2012 passed in R.C.A. No. 31 of 2011 by the II Additional Subordinate Judge (Rent Control Appellate Authority) confirming the order of eviction passed on the ground of wilful default dated 17.12.2009 in R.C.O.P. No. 66 of 2004 by the I Additional District Munsif (Rent Controller), Coimbatore. The petitioner is a tenant in respect of a commercial premises under the respondent on a monthly rent of Rs. 700/ -. Since the monthly rent payable by the petitioner was very less, the respondent filed R.C.O.P. No. 253 of 1996 for fixation of fair rent. On contest, the learned Rent Controller, fixed the fair rent at Rs. 5700/ - per month. Even after fixation of fair rent, since the petitioner continued to pay the contractual rent, the respondent filed R.C.O.P. No. 66 of 2004 for eviction on the ground of wilful default and owner's occupation. The Rent Controller came to the conclusion that the petitioner is liable to be evicted on the ground of wilful default and rejected the relief of eviction on the ground of owner's occupation. As there was no appeal by the respondent/landlord as against the rejection of eviction on the ground of owner's occupation, the same had attained finality. As far as eviction on the ground of wilful default is concerned, an appeal was filed by the petitioner in R.C.A. No. 31 of 2011. However, by the impugned order, the Appellate Court also confirmed the findings of the Trial Court and ordered eviction. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

(2.) MR . M. Baskar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that non -payment of difference in fair rent and the contractual rent will not be a ground for eviction and he relied upon the judgment of this Court rendered in Nelson and Another V.P. Ranganathan Mudaliar reported in : 1995 TLNJ 270.

(3.) AS far as the judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that the said judgment, reported in, 1995 TNLJ 270 has been overruled by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court reported in : (1996) 2 LW 849 (J. Visalakshi Ammal V. T.B. Sathyanarayana) wherein, it has been declared that fair rent fixed is the rent payable and non -payment of the fair rent fixed will make the tenant liable for eviction. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that only in the year 2012, the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs on being directed by this Court while admitting the civil revision petition and before that, only contractual rent was paid.