Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act | Late Payment Of Rent Despite Direction Of Revenue Court Valid Ground For Eviction : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that failure to follow the direction of the Revenue Court regarding payment of rent, is a valid ground for effecting eviction of the cultivating tenant under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955. The bench of Justices Krishna Murari and Ahsanuddin Amanullah was hearing an appeal against the decision of the Madras High Court, who had upheld the eviction order passed by the Revenue Court. The Revenue Court had passed the said order on the ground that the cultivating tenants had failed to pay the lease arrears within 2 months of the Revenue Court’s direction.Noting that the lease arrears were deposited by the tenants after over four months from the date of knowledge of the Revenue Court’s direction, the top court remarked that merely because the tenants had sent a Legal Notice, calling upon the respondent-landlords to come and collect the rent, it would not, ipso facto, discharge their onus in law to pay the lease arrears as per the direction of the Revenue Court.The court remarked that the 1955 Act confers a privilege on the cultivating tenant vis-a-vis the landlord, by which the cultivating tenant is protected from eviction by the landlord. Further, the scope of eviction of the cultivating tenant at the behest of the landlord, is circumscribed by the Act. Thus, the limited grounds for eviction of the cultivating tenant by the landlord under the Act, must not be frustrated by granting some extra benefit or indulgence to the cultivating tenant, the Apex Court said while upholding the decision of the High Court and the Revenue Court.The respondent-landlord, L. R. Eknath, filed a petition before the Revenue Court, seeking eviction of the appellant-tenants for not paying the lease rent.The Special Deputy Collector, Revenue Court, passed an order on 04.02.2019, directing the appellants to pay the lease rent to the landlords, within two months from the receipt of the said order, failing which eviction proceedings would be initiated against them. The lease amount was finally deposited by the appellants in the court on 18.02.2021.On an application filed by the respondent-landlords, the Revenue Court passed an eviction order on the ground that the appellants did not deposit the lease rent amount within two months from the receipt of the order.The appellant-tenants challenged the eviction order before the Madras High Court, who upheld the order of the Revenue Court. The same was challenged before the Supreme Court.The appellants, including K. Chinnammal, submitted before the top court that they had received the order dated 04.02.2019 passed by the Revenue Court, only on 10.10.2020. Thereafter, they had sent a Legal Notice to the respondent-landlord, L. R. Eknath, on 06.11.2020, i.e., within two months from the date of receipt of the said order, expressing their readiness and willingness to pay the lease rent and asking the landlords to collect the lease rent.Chinnammal argued that since the respondent-landlords failed to come and accept the lease rent arrears, the same was deposited in the Revenue Court on 18.02.2021. It was only thereafter, that the Revenue Court had ordered its eviction on the ground that the lease arrears were not paid within two months of the order dated 04.02.2019.Chinnammal pleaded that Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955 does not provide for eviction after the deposit of the due amount. Further, Section 3 of the 1955 Act also does not specify delay in deposit of rent as a ground for eviction. Thus, the Revenue Court ought not to have passed the eviction order.The Supreme Court reckoned that the order passed by the Revenue Court on 04.02.2019, directing the appellant-tenants to pay the lease arrears, was never challenged by them and thus, it had attained finality. Further, even upon receiving a copy of the said order on 10.10.2020, compliance was not made within two months, as directed.The court remarked that merely by sending a Legal Notice, calling upon the respondent-landlords to come and collect the rent, would not, ipso facto, discharge the appellants’ onus in law to pay. “The appellants could not have called upon the respondents via a Legal Notice to come and collect the rent as, simply stated, they were obliged in law, having not assailed the Order dated 04.02.2019, to pay and, if for any reason the respondent no.1, either due to non-availability or resistance/refusal to receive/accept the same, the Order dated 04.02.2019 had clearly provided that either 31½ bags of paddy or the amount equivalent thereto could easily have been deposited before the Revenue Court; as ultimately is stated to have been done by the appellants, though belatedly, on 18.02.2021,” said the court.The Apex Court observed that as per Section 3 of the 1955 Act, late payment of the rent as per the direction of the Revenue Court, is clearly a valid ground for effecting eviction. Further, Section 4 of the Act provides for...

Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act | Late Payment Of Rent Despite Direction Of Revenue Court Valid Ground For Eviction : Supreme Court

Parina Katyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Parina Katyal

Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act | Late Payment Of Rent Despite Direction Of Revenue Court Valid Ground For Eviction : Supreme Court

Parina Katyal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Parina Katyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers