B C DIOCESE OF MADURAI Vs. GANAPATHY IYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners, who are the landlords, filed R. C. O. P. Nos. 113, 115, 117, 119, 121, 123, 125, 131, 133, 135, 137, 157 and 195 of 1972 before the Rent controller Madurai (District Munsif, Madurai Town) against various tenants for getting possession of the portions they are occupying. The eviction is prayed from on two grounds (1) Under Ss. 10 (3) (b) and 14 (1) (b) of the Tamil Nadu buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, Finding that the pleas for eviction the one under Section 10 (3) (b) and the other, under Section 14 (1) (b) are self-contradictory, the Rent Controller rejected the plea for eviction under Section 10 (3) (b), but ordered eviction under Section 14 (1) (b) on condition that the petitioners (landlords) give the statutory undertaking under Section 14 (2) (b)within a period of one week from the date of the order.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller, the tenants preferred civil miscellaneous appeals individually,. By a common judgment, the Appellate Authority (Principal Subordinate Judge) Madurai, without going into the bona fides of the requirement by the petitioners, dismissed the eviction petitions holding that the eviction ordered by the Rent controller on condition that the petitioners give the statutory undertaking within a period of one week from the date of order of eviction, is not proper and legal and cannot therefore be sustained.

(3.) THE main ground on which the Appellate Authority dismissed the eviction petitions is that the undertaking contemplated under Section 14 (2) (b) is a condition precedent for ordering eviction under Section 14 (1) (b) and as such the eviction petitions filed without giving such an undertaking have to be dismissed.