Leave granted.
By an order dated 11.11.2005, XIV Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai
allowed the petition filed by the respondent for eviction of the petitioner on the
ground specified in Section 14(i)(b) of the Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent
Control) Act, 1960 (for short ‘the Act’). He referred to the evidence of the parties and
recorded a specific finding that the landlord immediately requires the premises for
demolition and reconstruction. The Rent Control Appellate Authority dismissed the
appeal preferred by the tenant (petitioner herein) and confirmed the eviction order
passed by the Small Causes Court. However, the High Court allowed the civil
revision, set aside the order of eviction on the grounds set out in Section 14(i)(a) of the
Act and dismissed the eviction petition.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Undisputedly, the
Small Causes Court and Rent Control Appellate Authority, after a comprehensive
evaluation of the pleadings and evidence of the parties, recorded a concurrent finding
that the tenanted premises (building) was in a dilapidated condition and the landlord
bonafide requires the same for its demolition and reconstruction. In the impugned
order, the High Court has not found that the concurrent
...2/-
finding recorded by the Small Causes Court and Rent Control Appellate Authority is
perverse or the conclusion recorded by them suffers from any patent error of law.
This being the position, the High Court was not justified in interfering with the order
passed by the Small Causes Court and upheld by the Rent Control Appellate
Authority.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, impugned order is set aside and the
order of eviction passed by the Small Causes Court and upheld by the Rent Control
Appellate Authority is restored. The appellant is granted time till 31st December,
2009, to vacate the premises in question upon filing usual undertaking in this Court
within four weeks from today. It is directed that in case the appellant fails to vacate
the premises in question within the aforesaid time, it would be open to the decree
holder to file an execution petition for delivery of possession and in case such a
petition has been already filed, an application shall be filed therein to the effect that
the appellant has not vacated the premises in question within the time granted by this
Court. In either eventuality, the Executing Court is not required to issue any notice
to the appellant. The Executing Court will see that delivery of possession is effected
within a period of fifteen days from the date of filing of the execution petition or the
application aforementioned. In case for delivery of possession any armed force is
necessary, the same shall be deputed by the Superintendent of Police within forty
eight hours from the date requisition is received therefor. It is also directed that in
case anybody else, other than the appellant, is found in possession, he shall also be
dispossessed from the premises in question.
[G.S. SINGHVI] New Delhi, March 23, 2009.