CRP/5932/2026 of Mahendran Vs Mangalakshmi on 1 October 2026

COMMON ORDER

The petitioner is the tenant, who has suffered an order of eviction in RLTOP No. 364 of 2025. The petitioner filed applications in M.P.Nos.2 and 3 of 2026 for condonation of delay in filing the application to set aside the ex- parte decree, along with an application to set aside the ex-parte decree.

2. The Rent Court, after enquiry, dismissed both the applications by order dated 04.11.2026. As against these orders of the Rent Court, the present revision petitions have been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that no notice was served on the revision petitioner and the Rent Court had proceeded to accept service on the ground that there is deemed service on the petitioner. He also brought to my notice that the notice was in fact returned as ‘door locked’ and private notice sent by the land lord was returned with an endorsement ‘intimation delivered’. The learned counsel for the petitioner therefore states that a fair opportunity may be given to the petitioner to contest the RLTOP on merits and seeks the indulgence of this Court to allow the revision petition and thereby, restored the RLTOP to file, to be decided on merits.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-landlord states that the petitioner has been a chronic defaulter in payment of rents and according to the learned counsel for the respondent, despite adjustment of the rental advance, the petitioner is in huge arrears of Rs.1,87,500/- and therefore, there is absolutely no merit in the contentions advanced with regard to an opportunity being given to the petitioner to contest the RLTOP on merits. He would also state that the Rent Court has rightly found that there has been proper service on the petitioner and no sufficient cause has been shown for explaining the delay in filing the application to set aside the ex-parte order of eviction. He therefore prays for the revision petition being dismissed.

5. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel on either side. I have also gone through the pleadings of the parties, as well as the impugned orders of the Rent Court, dismissing MP.Nos.2 and 3 of 2026 on the file of the XII Judge, Court of Small Causes (Rent Court), Chennai.

6. I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Rent Court, which has looked in to the records, including the process, service report, the factum of Batta being paid and the attempt made by the bailiff to serve Court notice. It is not the case of the petitioner that notice was sent to a wrong address and it is only to the tenanted premises that notice has been attempted to be served and therefore, the Court did not commit any error in accepting the endorsement of the process service to be corrected and amounting to deemed service of the petitioner.

7. In fact, the Court has also relied on the provisions of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, r/w Section 104 of BSA, 2023 to hold that service on the petitioner is sufficient and proper. In the light of the above, I do not find any grounds to interfere with the well considered orders passed by the Rent Court.

8. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought for time till 31.07.2027 to vacate and hand over vacant possession and also sought for waiver of arrears. In fact, an affidavit of undertaking has also been filed to this effect, requesting for time to vacate by 31.07.2027.

9. The learned counsel for the respondent would however vehemently oppose the said request for time, especially bringing to my notice the fact that the petitioner is in huge arrears of rent, even after adjusting the entire advance/security deposit. In the light of the above, while confirming the impugned orders in M.P.Nos.2 and 3 of 2026 and considering the fact that the Rent Court had initially passed an ex-parte order, without the appearance of the petitioner-tenant, I am inclined to grant time till 31.01.2027 to the petitioner to vacate and hand over vacant possession, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner-tenant shall vacate the tenanted premises on or before 31.01.2027, peacefully and without inducting any third parties into possession and without driving the respondent-landlord to forcible execution proceedings;

(ii) The petitioner shall pay rents at the rate of Rs.12,500/- from January 2026 onwards, till end of January 2027, by which time, the petitioner is directed to vacate and hand over possession to the respondent-landlord.

(iii) In so far as the arrears of rent from January 2026 to September 2026, the said nine months rent shall be paid on or before 30.11.2026. In so far as rents from October 2026 onwards, till January 2027, the rent shall be paid in advance, for example, the rent for October 2026 shall be paid on or before 10th of October 2026 and the last months rent, namely January 2027, shall be paid on or before 10th January 2027. There are no other mutual claims between the parties. It is needless to state that till such time the petitioner is in occupation of the tenanted premises, he shall be liable to pay the electricity consumption charges. It is open to the petitioner to either move a contempt or pursue the execution proceedings, in the event of any default committed by the petitioner.

10. With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 01-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ATA

P.B.BALAJI J. ATA To The XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai. CRP Nos. 5932 & 5933 of 2026 01-10-2026