SENGODAN AND ORS. Vs. C.P. SRINIVASA PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in this revision are the legal representatives of one late Sellakumara Gounder, a cultivating tenant within the meaning of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants' Protection Act (XXV of 1955), hereinafter referred to as the tenants Protection Act. The respondent herein is the landlord within the meaning of the Tenants Protection Act. Proceedings for eviction were initiated by the landlord in O.P. No. 12 of 1954 on the file of the Revenue Court on the ground of arrears of rent for four years, 1960 -1961, 1961 -1962, and 1963 -1964. The Revenue Court directed the payment of arrears and in default, ordered eviction, by order dated 15th February, 1965. This order was taken up in revision to this Court in C.R.P. NO. 398 of 1965 and Ramanujam, J., by order dated 14th September 1970 determined the arrears at Rs. 1,260 and directed to pay the same within 20th April, 1971 and in default of such payment, the tenant was directed to be vacated from the lands in question. A dispute arose as to whether the arrears were paid within time pursuant to the above order of this Court and the matter came up for consideration by this Court in C.M.P No. (sic) of 1971 in C.R.P. No. 398 of 1965. Ramanujam, J., directed the Authorised Officer, before whom the application for execution was pending, to consider the tenant's case as to whether there were payments in compliance with the orders of this Court in the civil revision petition referred to above and to pass the appropriate orders. This order in C.M.P. No. 10250 of 1971 in C.R.P. No. 398 of 1965 had come to be passed on 4th November, 1971. Before this controversy was adjudicated and an effective order of eviction could be passed, the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Arrears of Rent (Relief) Act, XXI of 1972, hereinafter referred to as the Rent Relief Act, came to be enacted and the Act was published on 11th August, 1972. Taking advantage of this beneficial legislation, the cultivating tenant filed a petition under Section 3 of the Rent Relief Act, praying for appropriate reliefs on the ground that he has paid the current rent within the meaning of the said Act. That petition is numbered as O.P. No. 65 of 1973 and is stated to be pending before the Authorised Officer (Land Reforms), Erode. The Authorised Officer, before whom the order of eviction was sought to be enforced in O.P. NO. 1 of 1972, considered the question as to the compliance or otherwise of the directions of this Court, passed in the earlier revision, C.R.P. No. 398 of 1965 as well as the order in C.M.P. No. 10250 of 1971 and he came to the conclusion that the cultivating tenant did not comply with the directions of this Court with regard to the clearance of arrears. It must be pointed out, by this time the cultivating tenant passed away and his legal representatives, the present petitioners, were brought on record. In this view, the Authorised Officer directed delivery of possession by order dated 18th January, 1977. This order was taken up in revision to this Court in C.R.P. No. 166 of 1977 and this revision had come to be disposed of by Ismail, J., by order dated 1st February, 1979. The learned Judge found no warrant for interference with the decision of the Authorised Officer and the revision was dismissed. Nothing remained to be done except to execute the order of eviction already passed. While the matter stood thus, the petitioners herein presented a petition on 6th February, 1979 before the Authorised Officer, bringing to his notice the pendency of O.P. No. 65 of 1973 for reliefs under the Rent Relief Act and about the provisions of another beneficial legislation, viz., Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants (Protection from Eviction) Act, XXXVI of 1976, hereinafter referred to as the Protection from Eviction Act, with the impact of all the amendments which came to be enacted thereon. However, the Authorised Officer, by order dated 24th February, 1979, directed the Special Deputy Tahsildar (Land Reforms), Erode, to evict the petitioners and hand over possession of the demised property to the respondent herein. The present revision is directed against the said orders of the Authorised Officer.

(2.) MR . K. Alagiriswami, learned Counsel for the petitioner, urges two grounds in favour of the petitioners and they are as follows:

(3.) AND whereas due to default in the payment of arrears of rent, landlords have taken action against cultivating tenants for eviction and for recovery of arrears of rent; And whereas, in the interests of the general public cultivating tenants should, at the present time, be spared the distractions and expenditure involved in such action in order that the maximum possible advantage may result to the State in the matter of production of food crops; And whereas it is considered necessary, as part of agrarian reform, to give relief to cultivating tenants from the burden of discharging arrears of rent, on condition of payment of the current rent to landlords.