M S JAWAHAR Vs. R PADMAVATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease & Rent control) Act 1960 as amended Act XXIII of 1973 and Act 1 of 1980 against the order and decreetal order of the learned Judge VII Small Causes Court, Chennai in R.C.A.No.168 of 2006 dated 07.07.2009 confirming the order and decreetal order of the learned Judge X Small causes court at Chennai at R.C.O.P.No.1092 of 2005, dated 28.12.2005.

(2.) IN the eviction petition filed by the respondent under Section 10(2)(ii)(a) & 10(2)(ii)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (lease & Rent control) Act 1960 are as follows:-2.(i) The petitioner is the owner of the premises in the ground floor in door No,23, Old No.11, Bharathi Salai (formerly known as Pycrofts Road) Triplicane, Chennai. The said shop was let out by this petitioner to the respondent only for doing business in fancy and gift items under the name and style of -Vijay Gift Paradise- and the tenant is not entitled to do any business without her consent. The terms of tenancy are governed by the agreement, dated 20.01.1994 and the rent payable by the respondent is Rs.1,650/- per month and the mode of payment is by account payee cheque.2.(ii) While so, contrary to the rental agreement, the respondent discontinued the business of fancy and gift items, but he had put up the name board -Vijay Book Store- in February,2005. Only then, the petitioner came to know of the business started by the respondent in sale of books. The conversion by the respondent of his business and use of the shop for a purpose other than that for which it was leased is unauthorised and without the written consent of the petitioner and as such, the respondent is liable to be evicted from the shop.2.(iii) Apart from that, the respondent has also installed or permitted a third party to run a STD and ISD booth of TATA INDICOM bearing phone No,55533763 without her written consent or permission. IN spite of her requests, the respondent refused to divulge the name of the person who is carrying on STD and ISD telecom business in the shop. The rental agreement prohibits such subletting. The said act on the part of the respondent is unauthorised and he is liable to be evicted from the shop.2.(iv) When the matter stood thus, on 05.03.2005, the petitioner issued a Lawyer's notice to the respondent to vacate the shop and deliver the possession thereof. But, on 19.03.2005, with false and untenable grounds, he sent a reply notice and a rejoinder notice was also issued by this petitioner on 24.03.2005. Hence, eviction order may be passed against the respondent.

(3.) IT is the version of the landlady that from February,2005 onwards, the tenant has been running a book shop under the name and style of the above-said book store. IT is stated by the tenant that with the consent and knowledge of the landlady, he has been running the book selling business. Those facts were alleged by the landlady in her notice dated 05.03.2005. But only in the reply, the tenant has admitted the running of book shop.