PARVATHIAMMAL Vs. V S SHANMUGHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Civil Revision petitions are filed against the common order dated 18. 10. 2005 made in C. F. R. Nos. 25865 and 30467 of 2005 on the file of the IV Additional District Munsif (District Judge,trainee, Coimbatore). THESE Civil Revision Petitions have been arisen from the order of the IV Additional District Munsif, Coimbatore .

(2.) THE petitioner has filed two applications in rcop. No. 216 of 2003. One is to condone the delay in filing the other application under Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants Protection Act 1922 and the other application has been filed praying for an order of vacant site out of total extent of 8 cents to be sold to the petitioner at a reasonable cost.

(3.) THE respondent before the forum below raised a question as to the maintainability of the application. THE Rent Control original petition was filed under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent control) Act, 1974. THE petition under Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants protection Act, 1922 would arise only in a suit for eviction. A petition under section 9 of the Madras City Tenants Protection Act in a rent control proceedings would not arise and further no question of condoning the delay would arise.