J AMRIT Vs. T N PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed in R.C.A.No. 65 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Madurai dated 16.03.2011 confirming the judgment and decree passed in R.C.O.P.No. 2 of 2002 on the file of the Pirncipal District Munsif Court, Madurai Town, dated 11.12.2006.

(2.) R.C.O.P.No.2 of 2002 was filed by the petitioner/landlord seeking for eviction of the petition schedule property under Section 10(2)(1) and 10(2)(6) of the TamilNadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The Rent Controller cum Principal District Munsif, Madurai Town has dismissed the petition. Against which, the landlord has preferred an appeal in R.C.A.No.65 of 2007. The said appeal was also dismissed confirming the order of the Rent Controller. Aggrieved by the orders of the courts below, the landlord is before this Court.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner/landlord would raise many grounds in this Revision and he would mainly argue that the courts below ought to have seen that the tenant is a chronic defaulter of rent and the courts below are erroneous in concluding that the shop was kept open by relying on Ex.B.11 to Ex.B.17. He would rely on the judgment reported in (In K.A.Jaganathan Vs.S.Shanju and another, 2010 4 MadLJ 52) wherein it has been held that if tenant commits default more than two months, he is termed as wilful defaulter.