T R PANDARINATHAN Vs. G PATTABI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this civil revision petition is made to the fair and decreetal orders of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Karur in R.C.A.No.11 of 2005, dated 15.09.2005, confirming the fair and decreetal orders, dated 17.02.2005, passed in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2004, by the Rent Controller, Karur.

(2.) In brief, according to the respondent / landlord, the petition schedule property (hereinafter, referred to as "the property") belonged to him, by virtue of the Sale Deed, dated 26.06.1995 and he had instructed his mother to collect the rent from the revision petitioner / tenant fixed at a sum of Rs.750/- per month and according to the landlord, the tenant was iregular in payment of the rent and that apart, he had been sending the rent by way of money order deducting the commission, which he is not entitled to do so and further, the tenant, after the demise of the landlord's mother on 09.01.1998, did not send the rent as agreed to between the parties and in such circumstances, the tenant had sent a notice to the landlord and also filed R.C.O.P.No.4 of 1998 seeking permission to deposit the rent in the Court and the landlord sent a suitable reply, on 11.03.1998, to the notice sent by the tenant and despite the same, the tenant continued to commit default in the payment of rent, which is nothing but wilful and the tenant has committed wilful default in the payment of rent from 01.01.1998 onwards and after due enquiry, R.C.O.P.No.4 of 1998 preferred by the tenant was dismissed and the appeal preferred by him, in R.C.A.No.3 of 2003, also came to be dismissed. Hence, inasmuch as the tenant has committed wilful default in the payment of rent, he is liable to be evicted on that ground.

(3.) The property is situated in the commercial area in the heart of the business place at Karur and the adjacent buildings are all newly constructed with modern facilities and the building constructed in the petition schedule property alone is the old building in the locality and more than hundred years old and not suitable to the present day living conditions and as it has become dilapidated and if the said superstructure is demolished and new construction is put up thereon with modern facilities, according to the landlord, the same would fetch more income and therefore, the landlord has sought for the eviction of the tenant from the property on the ground of demolition and reconstruction.