S.S.RAGAVACHARRY Vs. N.RAMANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Impugning the fair and decreetal orders, dated 25.01.2007, passed in R.C.A.No.37 of 2006, on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority/I Additional Sub Court, Madurai, confirming the fair and decreetal orders, dated 17.04.2006, passed in I.A.No.242 of 2005 in R.C.O.P.No.358 of 2004, on the file of the Rent Controller/Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai.

(2.) The respondents have preferred R.C.O.P.No.358 of 2004, against the revision petitioner, for eviction on the ground of wilful default. It is found that the respondents have also preferred an application, under Sec. 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Act'), in the above said rent control original proceedings and meanwhile, it is found that the revision petitioner/tenant alleging that the respondents have not established that they are entitled to maintain the rent control original petition on the footing that they are the exclusive owners of the property concerned and therefore, alleging that the wife of the deceased landlord Nagappan had also claimed ownership in respect of the property concerned along with her daughters and inasmuch there is a title dispute between the legal heirs of the deceased Nagappan as regards the property concerned, according to the revision petitioner, the said issue should be determined as a preliminary issue so as to decide as to whether the petitioners/landlords have entitlement to maintain the rent control original petition as such and hence, he preferred an application in I.A.No.242 of 2005, for determining the above issue as a preliminary issue in the matter.

(3.) Resisting the above application preferred by the revision petitioner, the respondents pointing that after the death of Nagappan, the revision petitioner had been tendering the rent to the respondents and also obtaining the receipts and according to them, with a view to delay the rent control original proceedings and also nullify the proceedings initiated by the respondents under Sec. 11(4) of the Act, the present application has been preferred by the revision petitioner and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed.