SUKHRAJ BAROLA Vs. D RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the judgment and decree dated 26.06.2014 made in R.C.A.No.458 of 2013 on the file of the VII Small Causes Court, Chennai, confirming the fair and decretal order dated 16.08.2013 made in R.C.O.P.No.1991 of 2012 on the file of the XIII Small Causes Court, Chennai.

(2.) The petitioner is the tenant and respondents are the landlord in R.C.O.P.No.1991 of 2012 on the file of the XIII Small Causes Court, Chennai. The respondents filed the said R.C.O.P against the petitioner for eviction on the ground of wilful default. According to the respondents, earlier, they filed R.C.O.P.No.1576 of 1999 for fixation of fair rent. The learned Rent Controller, by the judgment dated 18.02003, fixed the fair rent at Rs.3,416/-. The learned Appellate Authority, by the judgment dated 21.07.1999, modified the said order and fixed the fair rent at Rs.3,100/-. The petitioner was paying only contractual rent of Rs.500/-. After dismissal of R.C.A.No.458 of 2013, the respondent issued notice giving 15 days time to pay the difference amount. The petitioner received the notice. He neither sent reply, nor paid the arrears of rent. He filed C.R.P.No.1407 of 2009 against the respondents and their mother. When the Civil Revision Petition came up for admission, this Court directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as condition for stay. The petitioner complied with the said order. Subsequently, by the order dated 30.03.2012, this Court dismissed the said Civil Revision Petition, directing the petitioner to pay the entire arrears of fair rent within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order passed in the said Civil Revision Petition. The time granted by this Court has expired on 01.08.201 The petitioner did not pay the differential amount between the contractual rent and fair rent. The respondent filed present R.C.O.P.No.1991 of 2012 for eviction on the ground of wilful default.

(3.) The petitioner filed counter statement in the said R.C.O.P and denied all the averments and contended that mother of the respondent, D.Prema is also a co-owner. She was party to the earlier R.C.O.P.No.1576 of 1999 filed for fixation of fair rent. Non-joining of the mother of the respondents, a co-owner, the R.C.O.P.No.1991 of 2012 is not maintainable. The respondents have not sent any calculation memo after dismissal of the Civil Revision Petition, demanding the differential amount between the contractual rent and fair rent. The petitioner was regularly paying the rent and there is no arrears. During the pendency of the R.C.A.No.458 of 2013 and C.R.P.No.1407 of 2009, there was stay and fair rent was finally decided. The money order sent by the petitioner in August 2012 was refused by the respondents. The petitioner himself calculated difference in rent and tendered Rs.2,70,600/- to the respondents on the first date of hearing. The respondents and their counsel were absent on that day. The learned Rent Controller recorded the tendering of the rent by the petitioner. Subsequently, the counsel for the respondents received the said amount and therefore, prayed for dismissal of the present R.C.O.P.