A. ANBUMANI Vs. KANTHAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the revisions are arising from the order of remand passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Chengalpattu. The revision petitioner in C.R.P.No. 4 of 2006 by name Anbumani is the land lord of the premises in question and the respondent therein is the tenant. The tenant preferred the other revision in C.R.P.No.226 of 2006. For the sake of convenience, the parties in these revisions will be referred to according to their jural relationship.

(2.) The land lord filed the original petition in R.C.O.P.No.6 of 1992 on the file of the Rent Controller, Chengalpattu for eviction. The learned Rent Controller, Chengalpattu on 20.10.2000 dismissed the petition without cost. Subsequently, he preferred an appeal in R.C.A.No. 1 of 2001 along with application in I.A.No.905 of 2002 for reception of additional documentary evidence before the learned Rent Control Appellate Authroity, Chengalpattu. The learned Appellate Judge allowed the appeal setting aside the order of dismissal dated 20.10.2000 made in R.C.O.P.No. 6 of 1992 by the learned Rent Controller, Chengalpattu but, however, remitted the matter back to the Rent Controller, Chengalpattu for fresh disposal with a direction to permit both the landlord and the tenant to adduce additional evidence. He also allowed the application in I.A.No.905 of 2002, received the documents and directed the learned Rent Controller to mark those additional documents during the course of fresh enquiry. Aggrieved by the above order of remand, both the landlord and the tenant preferred these revisions respectively.

(3.) This Court heard both Ms.G.Sumithra learned cousnel appearing for the land lord and Ms.G.Nalini, learned cousnel appearing for the tenant.