K SRIDHARAN Vs. VASANTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall govern the above two revisions filed at the instance of the tenant-revision petitioner.

(2.) THE Court heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also for the respondent.

(3.) ADVANCING the arguments on behalf of the petitioner, the learned Counsel would submit that in the instant case, it is an admitted fact that he has been a tenant from 1976 onwards under the husband of the present landlady; that till the lifetime of the original landlord, the rental was paid; that it was raised to Rs. 400/- from January 1997 onwards; that from the time of the death of the original landlord, payments were made to the present landlady; that she was in the habit of issuing receipts; that from January 1997, she did not give receipt; that under the circumstances, the tenant was constrained to file the application for deposit of the rental before the Court; and that the filing of the application under Sec. 8(5) of the Act would reveal that when the receipt was not issued for payment of rental, the application was filed. Added further the learned Counsel that in the year 2003, a notice was served by the Corporation of Madras for payment of tax, since the payment of tax was not paid by the landlady, and under the circumstances, the tenant has made the payment of tax to the Corporation which has got to be adjusted, and hence, the revision petitions have got to be allowed accepting the case of the tenant that there was no default in payment of rental, much less willful default.