M RADHAKRISHNAN Vs. P LAKSHMIPATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order of Rent Control Authorities, dismissing the Petition filed under Rule 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Rules, declining to set aside the exparte order of eviction dated 05.07.2005.

(2.) R.C.O.P.No.474 of 2004 was filed by the Respondent / Landlord for eviction of the Petitioner / Tenant on the ground of Wilful Default. The Petitioner / Tenant was set exparte on 05.07.2005. The Petitioner has filed an Application in M.P.No.4 of 2006 to set aside the exparte order. That Application was dismissed by the learned Rent Controller on 01.02.2006. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner has preferred R.C.A.No.145 of 2006, which was also dismissed by the Impugned Order.

(3.) ACCORDING to the Petitioner, no proper notice was served upon him before passing exparte order and the Rent Controller ought to have set aside the exparte order. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that without referring the matter to the Handwriting Expert, the Rent Controller compared the signature in the Acknowledgement Cards and erroneously came to the conclusion that the signatures found in the Affidavit and the Acknowledgement Card are one and the same and erred in finding the Petitioner was duly served.