B VENKATESH Vs. NAGARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these Civil Revision Petitions, the Landlord is one and the same and he is the revision petitioner, challenging the order of the Learned Rent Controller/District Munsif, Ramanathapuram returning the Rent Control Original Petitions on the ground saying that in view of the enactment of new Rent Control Act namely "The Tamilnadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (Tamilnadu Act 42/2017)" came in to force on 04.08.2017, the Rent Control Tribunal has no jurisdiction to try the cases.

(2.) The Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner would submit that the Revision Petitioner/Landlord has filed four separate R.C.O.P. Among the four cases, he sought for Eviction as against three tenants on the ground of own use and occupation under Section 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, (Act 18 of 1960). In one case (in the case of tenant Nagarajan) the Revision petitioner filed Eviction on the ground of willful default and own use and occupation under Sections 10(2)(i) and 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Old Rent Control Act.

(3.) All the above Rent Control original Petitions were returned by the learned Rent Controller by the impugned docket order dated 27.06.2018 by holding that in view of the enactment of "The Tamilnadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (Tamilnadu Act 42/2017), the Rent Control Tribunal Court has no jurisdiction to try the cases under the old Rent Control Act. Hence, these Civil Revision Petitions have been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the aforesaid return.