K.SHYAMALA Vs. KHALEEL BASHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Civil Revision Petitions are directed against the concurrent findings of the Rent Control Courts below.

(2.) The landlady is the revision petitioner. The petitioner filed a petition for eviction for the wilful default committed by the respondent/ tenant. The respondent denied that the landlord - tenant relationship and the tenancy is in respect of the land only and not for the superstructure and therefore, the petition under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, is not maintainable. The Rent Controller has found that the tenant has incurred Rs.4,00,000/- for putting up the asbestos sheet superstructure. The Rent Controller, having found that the landlady has not proved that she leased out a building and failed to discharge her burden of proving the fact that the respondent is a tenant for the land and building, dismissed the eviction petition.

(3.) Against the order of the Rent Controller, the petitioner preferred an appeal in RCA No.725 of 2011 and also filed a miscellaneous petition in M.P.No.885 of 2013 for marking three documents, viz., common order copy in RCOP Nos.1186 of 1985, 1188 of 1985 to 1190 of 1985. The respondent / tenant did not file any counter and the miscellaneous petition was allowed.