ADILAKSHMI Vs. HUMERA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the fair and and decreetal order of the learned VIII Court of Small Causes at Chennai (Appellate Authority) partly allowing RCA.No.553 of 2011 dated 19.11.2012,which was filed against the fair and decreetal order of the XI Court of Small Causes, Chennai passed in RCOP.No.766 of 2009 dated 12.07.2011.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows:-

(3.) After hearing both the parties, the Rent Controller Appellate Authority found that the petitioner Humera begum is one of the legal heirs of Abdul Malick. The father of the Abdul Razaak was the original owner of the subject property, who died on 06.07.196 During his life time, Abdul Razaak executed a sale deed in favour of his wife Hava Bee for a sale consideration of Rs. 600/- vide Doc.No.2835/1918 (Ex.P1). The said Hava Bee died intestate leaving behind her only son Mr.Abdul Malick. The said Abdul Malick died on 11.12.1995 intestate leaving behind his legal heirs viz., 1.Habeea 2. Ummul Huda Hafeeza 4.Humura Begam, are the daughters. Therefore, the Appellate Authority found that the subject property was inherited by the petitioner as per the Mohammedan Law. The Appellate Authority found that the petitioner as a co-owner she is entitled to file a petition on behalf of other co-owners to evict the tenant. Further, the Appellate Court held that as per Section 2(6) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control ) Act, the landlady includes the co-owner of the property. Therefore, the Appellate Authority found that the petitioner is the owner and the respondent is the tenant. Hence, the Appellate Authority had set aside the judgment and decree passed in RCOP.No.766/2009 on the ground of willful default and directed the respondent/tenant to vacate the premises. As against the said order, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner/tenant.