PALANI ROMAN CATHOLIC MISSION Vs. MURUGAN AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Second Appeal and the Civil Revision Petition arise out of a suit in ejectment instituted by the appellant in the Second Appeal (hereinafter referred to as "the Roman Catholic Mission") against the respondent therein and Proceedings under S. 9 of the Tamil Nadu City Tenants' Protection Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') initiated by the respondent in the Second Appeal and the Civil Revision Petition against the Roman Catholic Mission. An extent of 36,432 sq, ft. of vacant site comprised in T. S. No. 15/1 in Ward No. 4, Palani Town, was originally leased out by the Roman Catholic Mission to one Karuppanna Gounder on 6-10-1956 for a period of five years on a monthly rental of Rs. 67.50. The lessee had PW up certain superstructures thereon. The respondent w these proceedings and one Animal purchased the superstructures from Karuppanna Gowuler and on- 25-6-1959, entered into a fresh lease with the Roman Catholic Mission for the unexpired period of the lease on a monthly rental of Rs. 901- in respect of the entire extent originally leased out to Karuppanna Gounder. The original, lessee KarupPenna. Gounder had; also petitioned the Municipality for the transfer of the registry in favour of the pmchasers. After the expiry of the lease entered into on 25-6-1959, the respondent in these proceeding entered into a fresh lease agreement with the Roman Catholic Mission on 1-11-1-961 for a period of three Years in respect of the entire extent on a monthly rental of Rs. 250/~-. Subsequently the respondent in these proceedings surrendered a fine of shops as well as a residential house put and entered into another fresh team agreement on 331965 for -a period of three years on a monthly rental of Us. $N- in respect of an extent of 26,037 sq. k an the western portion of T. S. N 15/1, The Roman Catholic Mission issued a notice on 28-81968 calling upon the respondent in these proceedings to deliver vacant possession of that property for the purpose of putting up a shed and also for providing a playground for the children and for holding! Bible clams. In response to that, the respondent in these proceedings sent a reply on 6-9-1968 requesting the Roman Catholic Mission to execute a fresh lease agreement for a period of three years as per the terms of the lease deed dated, 34-1965 under . which the respondent in these. proceedings had been given an option to seek: a renewal of the lease for a period, of three years. The Roman Catholic Mission.. did not accede to the request. of the respondent in these proceedings, but instead filed a suit in 0. S. No., 218, of 1969p . District Munsiff's Court-Palani, for recovery of vacant possession. The. respondent in these proceedings, in,her turn, instituted 0. S. No.,75 of 1970, District Munsifs Court, Palani, for directing the Roman Catholic Mission to execute a.fresh. lease in, her favour. Ultimately, on 14-12-1970, 0. S. No. 218 of 1969 ended. in a compromise. The terms of. the compromise were as follows:

(2.) In the written statement filed, while accepting the terms of the compromise entered into in 0. S. No. 218 of 1969 and the decree thereon, the respondent in these proceedings contended that as the Roman Catholic Mission required the property in her occupation for the purpose of shifting the Therasammal School she had agreed to vacate the premises within a period of one year if the property was actually so required by the Roman Catholic Mission, that if it was not so required, as had actually happened, she was entitled to continue as a tenant andinfact the Roman. Catholic Mission did not require the premises and, therefore, the respondent in these proceedings had continued to be in possession as a tenant as before on payment of the rent of - Rs. 150/-per mensern. After referring to the demand for enhanced rent and the sending of a printed rent deed for her signature and her refusal to sign the same on the ground that the compromise decree was sufficient to evidence the lease in her favour, the respondent in these proceedings stated that she had been treated and accepted as a tenant by the Roman Catholic Mission and rents had also been regularly paid and received and that the claim of the Roman Catholic Mission that the decree dated 14-12-1970 subsisted was not correct. While, therefore, refuting the claim for recovery of possession made by the Roman Catholic Mission, the respondent in these proceedings also raised an objection that the suit was not maintainable without a notice as contemplated under S. 11 of the Act. The respondent in these proceedings further stated that she would be taking separate proceedings under S. 9 of the Act. On these grounds, she prayed for the dismissal of the suit.

(3.) Consistent with the stand taken by the respondent in these proceedings in her written statement, she filed 0. P. No. 4 of 1977 before the District Munsif, Palani, under S. 9 of the Act. In that application filed on 6-6-1977, after service of summons in the suit on 25-41977, after referring to the compromise decree in 0. S. No. 218 of 1969 and her continuing to remain in possession of the property even thereafter as a tenant and stating that the provisions of the Act had been extended to the area in question with effect from 31-5-4975 by means of G. 0. Ms. No. 1285, Revenue, dated 31-5-1975, the respondent claimed that she was entitled to an order directing the sale of the site in her occupation and enjoyment by the Roman Catholic Mission. That application was resisted by the Roman Catholic Mission on the ground that the relationship of landlord and tenant, though created under lease deed dated 3-3-1965, did not continue to operate as a result of the decree in 0. S. No. 218 of 1969, which subsisted till date and that under the terms thereof, the respondent in these proceedings could not claim benefits as a tenant. It was the further plea of the Roman Catholic Fissions that the application filed by the respondent in these proceedings under S, 9 of the Act was out of time.