J. M. SAMY Vs. B. VARADAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is focussed as against the judgment and decree dated 05.12.1990 made in O.S.No.351 of 1988 on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner. Despite printing the name of the respondents there is no representation for the respondents either in person or through their counsel.

(3.) THIS appeal is focussed as against the judgment and decree dated 05.12.1990 in dismissing the original suit. The nitty gritty, the gist and kernel of the case as stood exposited from the records could be portrayed thus: The parties herein are referred to according to their litigation status before the trial Court. The plaintiff/appellant is a registered partnership firm, which took on lease the premises belonging to the defendant for a monthly rent. There were several lease agreements between them which contained so many clauses concerning loan transactions, relating to such loans towards interest a sum of Rs.200/ - p.m. had to be deducted from out of the total monthly rent of Rs.600/ - and only the remaining Rs.400/ - p.m. was payable. While so when such arrangement was going on smoothly, the defendant turned turtle and had a volte face and started disturbing the plaintiff. Maliciously the defendant initiated R.C.O.P. proceedings, in which eviction was ordered on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent. It so happened that there was a delay in filing revision before the High Court as against the order which emerged in the rent control proceedings, but the High Court dismissed it. As against which S.L.P. was filed. At the time of admission the Honourable Apex Court ordered a sum of Rs.25,000/ - (Rupees Twenty -five Thousand only) towards arrears of rent to be deposited by the plaintiff in the Hon'ble Supreme Court; in compliance with it the plaintiff deposited the said sum of Rs.25,000/ -. However, the Honourable Apex Court subsequently dismissed the S.L.P. No.7506 of 1984. Thereupon, the defendant filed an application before the Hon'ble Apex Court and withdrew the said sum of Rs.25,000/ - deposited by the plaintiff, even though the defendant was bound to pay a sum of Rs.200/ - p.m. as interest towards the loans obtained by the defendant from the plaintiff. Hence, the suit was filed.