N DURAISAMY Vs. R ASOKAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DURAISAMY the petitioner/landlord challenging the judgment and decree in M.A.No.38 of 1993 dated 16.2.1995 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Pondicherry in setting aside the fair order and decretal order in H.R.C.O.P.No.108 of 1992 dated 30.6.1993 on the file of the Rent Controller. Pondicherry, has preferred this revision.

(2.) THE petitioner is the landlord. THE respondent is the tenant. THE respondent took the premises on lease from the petitioner on 21.9.1990 for residential purpose on a monthly rent of Rs.500 THE respondent paid an advance of Rs.1500 to the petitioner. He was paying the rents upto May, 1992, THEreafter, he defaulted in making the payment of rent. On 17.8.1992, the petitioner issued a notice demanding the arrears of rent and amenity charges. Despite receipt of notice, the respondent did not choose to reply. Under these circumstances, the petitioner filed a petition for eviction.

(3.) ON hearing the parties and on perusal of the impugned order and other documents, the Appellate Authority allowed the appeal mainly on the ground that the petition for eviction filed by the petitioner Duraisamy is not maintainable, since admittedly the petitioner was only a co-owner and so, the petition could not be maintained in the absence of the consent given by the other co-owners. It is also held on the strength of Ex.B-1 that there is no wilful default on the part of the tenant, since from June, 1992, he paid the rental amounts to the other co-owners.