SENGAPPAN Vs. ARUMBATHA VEDA VINAYAGAR TEMPLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant in O.S. No. 203 of 1992 on the file of the First Additional District Munsif Court at Pondicherry is the appellant.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit for eviction and for recovery of arrears of rent. Ex. A3 is the lease deed dated 1.10.1980. It is stated in the plaint that the defendant in the year 1980 approached the plaintiff for taking of lease of the vacant site which is scheduled in the plaint for his residence and the plaintiff agreed for the same and on 1.10.1980, the defendant executed the lease deed, agreeing to pay monthly rent of Rs. 5/- and the lease period agreed is three years and an amount of Rs. 50/- was also paid as advance. THE lease period expired on 1.10.1983 and the defendant is holding over the tenancy. THE defendant has defaulted in paying rent from October 1990 and continued to default till date. A notice was issued terminating the tenancy on 23.1991. But the defendant has neither vacated, the premises nor he has paid the rental arrears. It is further alleged that the property is required for the own occupation of the plaintiff. A suit was therefore laid for evicting the defendant from the plaint scheduled property and also for recovery of arrears of rent from the month of October 1990 to February 1992 at the rate of Rs. 5/- per month.

(3.) THE only point that is urged by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the lease deed dated 1.10.1980 being for a term exceeding one year is compulsorily registerable and having not registered it cannot be admitted in evidence for any purpose. A further contention has also been raised that the lease deed is not stamped properly and therefore, it, shall not be looked into even for a collateral purpose.