Madras High Court
CRP/4558/2026 of Johaan Sujith Vs Kamalakshi Pillai Shankar on 14 August 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-08-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP No. 4558 of 2026
and CMP.No.20030 of 2026
Johaan Sujith
… Petitioner
Vs
Kamalakshi Pillai Shankar
alias Kala S.Pillai
D/o.Shankar Narayanan
residing at No.9, Cardinal Lane East
North Port,
New York – 11731, USA
Rep.by Power of Attorney
K.V.Veeraraghavan
S/o.Late Krishnaswamy
residing at No.7/2, Singarachari Street, Triplicane, Chennai 5, Power petition M.P.No.3/2025 in RLTOP No.93/20205
Allowed by order dated 24.10.2025 … Respondent Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, against the docket order dated 27.07.2026 passed by the learned XV Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in E.A.No.3 of 2026 in E.P.No.502 of 2026 in RLTOP.No.93 of 2025.
For Petitioner
Mr.Samir Shah
for Shah and Shah
For Respondent(s):
Mr.V.Jayakumar
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Heard Mr.Samir Shah, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Mr.V.Jayakumar, learned counsel for the respondent/landlord.
2. Mr.Samir Shah, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the tenant is in the process of vacating the premises and he has already removed most of the belongings and he only requires further two weeks time to vacate in its entirety and hand over the vacant possession to the respondent landlord.
3. Per contra, Mr.V.Jayakumar, learned counsel for the respondent/landlord opposes the request by stating that, originally the petitioner wanted time only till today. He would also bring to my notice that the petitioner is in arrears of rent for 17 months. He would therefore pray for the extension request being rejected in toto.
4. I have carefully considered the submissions made on either side.
5. Admittedly, the fact that the petitioner is in the process of vacating, is not seriously disputed. Secondly, with regard to the alleged arrears of rent, even according to the respondent/landlord, a civil suit has been already filed for recovery of arrears, in which the petitioner propose to make a counter claim. Therefore, the said issue cannot be decided in a summary manner in this revision. It is left open to both parties to put forth their claims and contentions in the pending civil suit. Insofar as the request sought for by way of an extension up 31.08.2026 is concerned, considering that the petitioner has already started moving his belongings and only requires two weeks time, I am inclined to accede to the said request.
6. With the above observations and directions, the civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
7. Post the matter on 01.09.2026 under the caption “for reporting compliance”. 14-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No DPQ
P.B.BALAJI, J. DPQ CRP No. 4558 of 2026 and CMP.No.20030 of 2026 14-08-2026