SAHUL HAMEED Vs. SHAJAHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner herein (Landlord) has filed this petition against the respondent (Tenant), seeking to set aside the order dated 29.07.2013 made in R.C.A.No.2 of 2012 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Sub-Court, Pudukkottai, reversing the well considered fair and decreetal order dated 19.10.2012 made in R.C.O.P.No.1 of 2009 on the file of Rent Controller, District Munsif Court, Pudukkottai. R.C.O.P.No.1 of 2009 was filed by the Landlord / revision petitioner herein for evicting the Tenant / respondent herein so as to give vacant possession of the property to the Landlord, which was allowed by the learned Rent Controller. Aggrieved by the same, the Tenant filed appeal in R.C.A.No.2 of 2012 for setting aside the order in R.C.O.P.No.1 of 2009, which was allowed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Sub-Court, Pudukkottai. Challenging the said appeal, revision petitioner / Landlord is before this Court.

(2.) For the sake of brevity, the parties would be referred to as "Lordlord (revision petitioner)" and "Tenant (respondent)".

(3.) It is the case of the Landlord that there was an oral agreement between him and the Tenant to rent out his building to the Tenant at the monthly rent of Rs. 950/- on payment of Rs. 10,000/- as advance, for the purpose of conducting his business and the respondent has been running an electrical/electronic shop in the premises. The tenant had filed a suit in O.S.No.402 of 2008 against the Landlord and also obtained an interim order against him on the false averment that he had paid Rs. 50,000/- as advance. Subsequently, the Landlord had voluntarily allowed the suit to get exparte so as to file a petition for eviction.