SRI KAILASANATHASWAMI Vs. G KRISHNA AYYAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by the plaintiff under Section 25 of the Small Cause Courts Act to revise the decree of the Additional Sub-Court of Tirunelveli dismissing the plaintiff's suit.

(2.) The petitioner is the Executive Officer of the Kailasanathaswami temple, while the respondent here who was the defendant before the Subordinate Judge was a person who had taken on lease a vacant site belonging to the plaintiff-petitioner. The property of the plaintiff temple was leased to the defendant under a registered lease deed dated 1-3-1942 for a period of five years and the defendant undertook to surrender vacant possession of the site on 28-2-1947. He also agreed to remove the superstructures which he might put thereon. Under the terms of the lease, the landlord (plaintiff) had to pay the vacant site tax due to the Municipality, while the lessee who was intending to put up structures upon the site covenanted to pay the municipal tax due on the property which at that time was a sum of Rs. 9-12-0. The defendant did not surrender possession as covenanted in the lease deed with the result that the plaintiff had to institute O. S. No. 100 of 1947 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Tirunelveli for possession of the vacant site & for mesne profits accruing therefrom subsequent to 1-3-1947 and a decree was passed in favour of the plaintiff directing the defendant to remove the superstructures and deliver vacant possession and also pay the mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 100 per mensem for the site from 1-3-1947. This decree of the District Munsif is dated 14-8-1947. There was an appeal to the District Court of Tirunelveli in A. S. No. 303 of 1947 and this was dismissed on 171- 1948 the defendant preferred a further second appeal to this court, numbered. S. A. No. 628 of 1948 and this also failed and was dismissed by this court on 25-91951.

(3.) Meanwhile as the lessee failed and neglected to pay property tax due to the Municipality on the superstructures erected by the lessee, the Devastanam paid on various dates from 3-8-1948 upto 12-2-1951 a sum of Rs. 640-3-10. As the defendant failed to make good these amounts to the lessor, the present suit was filed for recovery of this sum of Rs. 640-3-10 from the defendant. The plaint in the present suit, S. C. S. No. 311 of 1951 is dated 3-8-1951. In the plaint the plaintiff, i.e., the petitioner here, after setting out the litigation between the parties proceeded to state that the defendant had by the terms of the lease agreed to pay the municipal tax due for the leased premises. He was, therefore, bound to pay the same by law and under the contract. The plaint also alleged that the defendant failed and neglected to pay the tax in spite of repeated requests by the plaintiff whereon the lessor paid the tax to the municipality to avert its sale for arrears of tax. On these allegations, the plaintiff sought reimbursement of the sum above mentioned, paid as property tax.