C. MOTHICHAND Vs. R. NANDAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the judgment and decree passed in RCA No.1 of 2013, the decree dated 18.07.2014 passed by the learned The Principal Sub Judge (Rent Control Appellate Authority) at Mayiladuthurai reversing the judgment and decree passed in RCOP No.2 of 2012, the decree dated 18.12.2012 on the file of the Rent Controller (the Principal District Munsif), Mayiladuthurai.

(2.) The petitioner is the landlord and the respondent is the tenant in RCOP No.2 of 2012 on the file of Principal District Munsif, Mayiladuthurai. The petitioner filed the above said RCOP against the respondent for eviction on the ground of wilful default and owner's occupation. According to the petitioner, the respondent and his brother originally took the petition premises for running a medical shop. Subsequently, during middle of the year 2006, the said medical shop was closed and the respondent alone started a xerox and cellphone recharging business in the petition premises. The tenancy is oral and the monthly rent is Rs.2,000/-. The petitioner endorsed the rent receipt in the note book (kachattu) for every month which is in the custody of the respondent. The respondent paid rent upto December 2010 however, stopped paying the rent thereafter. The petitioner issued notice to the respondent on 28.09.2011. The respondent sent reply containing false allegations. The respondent sent a sum of Rs.4000/- claiming monthly rent as Rs.1,000/-. According to the petitioner, monthly rent is Rs.2,000/- and petitioner adjusted the sum of Rs.4,000/- sent by the respondent towards rent for the month of January and February 2011. A re-joinder was sent by the petitioner to the respondent. The respondent sent a sum of Rs.1,000/- on 01.11.2011, another sum of Rs.1,000/- on 12.12.2011 and Rs.1,000/-. The petitioner adjusted the said amounts towards rent for the month of March 2011 and half monthly rent for April 2011. Till January 2012, arrears of rent is Rs.19,000/- and non-payment of rent by the respondent is wilful and respondent has committed wilful default.

(3.) Before the Rent Controller, the petitioner examined himself as PW1 and marked six documents as Exs.A1 to A6. The respondent examined himself as RW1 and marked one document as Ex.B1. The learned Rent Controller, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence and arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, allowed the RCOP ordering eviction of the respondent by granting two months to vacate and handover the possession of the petition premises to the petitioner.