CHANDRAN Vs. GOPALAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioners in all the revision petitions are the landlords. These revisions are directed against the orders of dismissal of R. C. O. P. Nos. 1 to 3 of 1994 on the file of the Rent Control (District Munsif) Court, Gobichettipalayam, as per orders dated 6. 8. 1996, filed for eviction on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent and also on the ground of denial of title, as confirmed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Subordinate Judge), Gobichettipalayam in R. C. A. Nos. 3 to 5 of 1996, as per judgments dated 19. 8. 1997.

(2.) THOUGH all the revision petitions arise out of separate judgments, since the landlords in all these revision petitions are one and the same and similar question of law and fact arises, all these revision petitions are being disposed of by this common order.

(3.) THE revision petitioners/landlords filed R. C. O. P. Nos. 1 to 3 of 1994 against the respondents/tenants for eviction from the petition premises. These Rent Control Original Petitions were resisted by the respondents/tenants in the counters stating that the rent payable is only 50/-, 100/- and 125/- per month and not Rs. 200/-, 350/- and Rs. 1,000/- per month respectively as claimed by the revision petitioners/landlords and that the landlords alone are not entitled to the petition premises let out to the tenants but to one Rajendran also in all these Rent Control Original Petitions. The said Rajendran has also claimed title, and in fact, as per the direction of his father, Thiruvengadam, under whom, the respondents/tenants took tenancy in respect of the petition premises, the rent is paid to the said Rajendran, on the demise of the said Thiruvengadam.