E PALANISAMY Vs. PALANISAMY
LAWS(SC)-2002-10-84
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADRAS)
Decided on October 31,2002

E.PALANISAMY Appellant
VERSUS
PALANISAMY Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KULDEEP SINGH VS. GANPAT LAL [REFERRED TO]
M BHASKAR VS. J VENKATARAMA NAIDU [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

TRUST ESTATE KHIMJI KESHAWJI VS. PIONEER MECHANICALS [LAWS(CAL)-2016-1-26] [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISHBHAI ISHWARBHAI ROCHANI VS. COSMOS CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD [LAWS(GJH)-2012-11-205] [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH PRASAD GUPTA VS. SUDHA MEHRA [LAWS(ALL)-2023-5-205] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MALHOTRA BOOK DEPOT [LAWS(DLH)-2013-2-199] [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN NADIA DISTRICT PRIMARY SCHOOL COUNCIL VS. JYOTSNA RANI RAY [LAWS(CAL)-2007-12-15] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR VS. KAPOOR CHANDRA AGARWAL DHARAMSHALA TRUST [LAWS(ALL)-2019-5-150] [REFERRED TO]
ISHWAR CHAND SURESH KUMAR VS. SUNITA GARG [LAWS(P&H)-2009-1-23] [REFERRED TO]
MANIK LAL MAJUMDAR VS. GOURANGA CHANDRA DEY [LAWS(SC)-2004-2-123] [REFERRED TO]
ATMA RAM VS. SHAKUNTALA RANI [LAWS(SC)-2005-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR AGRAWAL VS. CHANDRAKANT PANDEY [LAWS(MPH)-2007-3-46] [REFERRED TO]
MADANLAL VS. GOPAL SINGH [LAWS(MPH)-2020-12-42] [REFERRED TO]
UMMED BAGHEL VS. MOHD ANEES KHAN [LAWS(MPH)-2017-6-168] [REFERRED TO]
JAGADESAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2015-2-266] [REFERRED TO]
VAGARAM PATEL VS. K C SIVAKARAN [LAWS(MAD)-2015-3-695] [REFERRED]
KRISHNASAMY VS. KANNIKA [LAWS(MAD)-2013-8-103] [REFERRED TO 4.]
ARUNAGIRI VS. H SURAJBAI [LAWS(MAD)-2012-7-370] [REFERRED TO]
Khyrunnissa VS. Rose Nissa [LAWS(MAD)-2005-3-117] [REFERRED TO]
VENKATA SUBBA REDDIAR VS. T KANNAN ALIAS DEVARASSU [LAWS(MAD)-2005-7-90] [REFERRED TO]
RASHIK KUMAR VS. VIRENDRA KUMAR AND ANR. [LAWS(ALL)-2010-11-396] [REFERRED TO]
MITHLESH KUMARI AGRAWAL VS. VITH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE [LAWS(ALL)-2013-2-256] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA KUMAR VS. P BHASKAR RAJU [LAWS(APH)-2003-11-51] [REFERRED TO]
HIMAL MATCH COMPANY PVT.LTD VS. RAJ BANSI BHAGAT [LAWS(SIK)-2009-11-3] [REFERRED TO]
HEERA LAL VS. MANDIR SHRI THAKURJI SANGRIA [LAWS(RAJ)-2005-3-53] [REFERRED TO]
G.P. NURSERY AND PRIMARY SCHOOL VS. V. SEETHAPATHY [LAWS(MAD)-2020-5-91] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR SAMANTA VS. WEST BENGAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD [LAWS(NGT)-2014-7-5] [REFERRED TO]
Abdul Majid VS. J Seetha [LAWS(MAD)-2004-2-104] [REFERRED TO]
R MITTALAL JAIN VS. JOHNY DCOUTA [LAWS(MAD)-2004-4-233] [REFERRED TO]
VASANTHA MALIGA VS. N.BACHERLAL [LAWS(MAD)-2017-8-80] [REFERRED TO]
KR SATHAPPAN VS. AR RENGANAYAGI [LAWS(MAD)-2010-12-119] [REFERRED TO]
P SIVACHANDRAN VS. M P PURUSHOTHAM [LAWS(MAD)-2008-1-31] [REFERRED TO]
S. PANNEERAMMAL VS. RAVICHANDRAN [LAWS(MAD)-2016-9-70] [REFERRED TO]
S A SULOCHANA VS. KALYANI [LAWS(KER)-2005-5-34] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNASAMY VS. KANNIKA [LAWS(MAD)-2013-7-267] [REFERRED TO]
M.R. GOPINATHAN VS. R.B. MANIKANDAN [LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-316] [REFERRED TO]
LOGANATHA MUDALIAR VS. RAGHUNATHLAL [LAWS(MAD)-2012-7-94] [REFERRED TO]
M.RAJARATHINAM VS. J.BABU SHANTHI [LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-122] [REFERRED TO]
K RAJA VS. A MEERA MOIDEEN [LAWS(MAD)-2018-7-489] [REFERRED TO]
G RAMASWAMY VS. TALUK EXCISE OFFICER TRICHY [LAWS(MAD)-2007-3-154] [REFERRED TO]
BHASKARAN VS. NATESAN [LAWS(MAD)-2010-8-584] [REFERRED TO]
RAGHUNATH RAI BAREJA VS. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK [LAWS(SC)-2006-12-72] [REFERRED TO]
NASIRUDDIN VS. SITA RAM AGARWAL [LAWS(SC)-2003-1-112] [REFERRED TO]
REKHA DEVI VS. BUNIYAD HUSSAIN AND ANOTHER [LAWS(UTN)-2015-8-80] [REFERRED]
JUST RIGHTS FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE VS. S. HARISH [LAWS(SC)-2024-9-54] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDER KUMAR GANDHI S/O LATE GULABCHAND GANDHI R/O FLAT NO. 201, H.NO.4 VS. BINDESH KAMDAR S/O LATE RAMESH KUMAR 3 [LAWS(APH)-2016-9-47] [REFERRED TO]
SINGHASAN RAI VS. BHAGWAN DEI [LAWS(ALL)-2008-1-134] [REFERRED TO]
VIRENDRA KUMAR KHANNA VS. MANISH CHHATWAL [LAWS(ALL)-2008-10-72] [REFERRED TO]
CHHETRAPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2004-1-149] [REFERRED TO]
KALITHODY SAHADERAN THIRUMULPAD @ K.S. THIRUMULPAD VS. RAHUL MOITRA [LAWS(CAL)-2017-3-116] [REFERRED TO]
BISWAJIT DAS VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2017-4-56] [REFERRED TO]
SAMEER WASON VS. RAJINDER KUMAR LAMBA [LAWS(DLH)-2010-3-19] [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISHBHAI ISHWARBHAI ROCHANI VS. COSMOS COOPERATIVE BANK LTD [LAWS(GJH)-2012-9-163] [REFERRED TO]
JAI KISHAN VS. KAMLESHWAR NATH ARORA [LAWS(DLH)-2013-2-359] [REFERRED TO]
YUSUFUL HAQ ALIAS YUSUF VS. GHAYYUR FATMA [LAWS(ALL)-2012-2-240] [REFERRED TO]
SAJEDA KHATOON VS. BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2012-9-28] [REFERRED TO]
ROSHNI COLD STORAGE PVT LTD VS. 1ST ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE BAREILLY [LAWS(ALL)-2008-4-216] [REFERRED TO]
BRAHM DUTT VS. DAYA RAM [LAWS(ALL)-2008-4-249] [REFERRED TO]
HARISH AHUJA VS. S P MINOCHA [LAWS(DLH)-2009-5-209] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD SAIED VS. MODEL PRESS P LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2010-2-115] [REFERRED TO]
MANJIT SINGH VS. VIRENDRA SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2019-10-247] [REFERRED TO]
VIKAS WSP LTD. VS. DIRECTORATE ENFORCEMENT [LAWS(DLH)-2020-11-130] [REFERRED TO]
LATHA VS. K.R.SHANTHA [LAWS(MAD)-2012-12-266] [REFERRED TO]
J.BOORARAM ALIAS J.B.CHOUDRY VS. B.MOHAN [LAWS(MAD)-2012-12-85] [REFERRED TO]
J V BHOOPALAN VS. RAJAMANI CKAMMAL [LAWS(MAD)-2006-11-144] [REFERRED TO]
A KOIL RAJ VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2007-3-151] [REFERRED TO]
THE BOMBAY BURMAH TRADING CORPORATION LTD. VS. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2017-9-121] [REFERRED TO]
D. BASKARAN VS. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS [LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-943] [REFERRED TO]
N.RENUKA DEVI VS. E.LALITHA [LAWS(MAD)-2016-3-243] [REFERRED TO]
S. RAJASEKAR AND ORS. VS. SARTAJ BEGUM AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-3-344] [REFERRED TO]
HUKMARAM PATEL VS. K.C. SIVAKARAN [LAWS(MAD)-2015-3-387] [REFERRED TO]
P. VIAJAKUMARI SAMU VS. PANDI DURGA SAIBABA SEVA MAIYAM [LAWS(MAD)-2024-1-118] [REFERRED TO]
CELIR LLP VS. BAFNA MOTORS (MUMBAI) PVT. LTD. [LAWS(SC)-2023-9-59] [REFERRED TO]
BALWANT SINGH VS. ANAND KUMAR SHARMA [LAWS(SC)-2003-1-19] [REFERRED]
PUSHPA GUPTA VS. SUBHASH CHANDRA [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-48] [REFERRED TO]
RANI DEVI & 6 OTHERS VS. ADDL DISTT & SESSION JUDGE,CT NO 13, LUCKNOW & 2 O [LAWS(ALL)-2018-4-348] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD AZIM AND ANOTHER VS. GOPAL SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2012-11-172] [REFERRED TO]
HARBANSH LAL VS. BRIJ RANI [LAWS(ALL)-2008-4-316] [REFERRED TO]
RAMAN LAL VS. SHRI JANKI VALLABH JI MAHARAJ VIRAJMAN MANDIR QASBA BISAULI AND ANOTHER [LAWS(ALL)-2008-4-317] [REFERRED TO]
RANGAIAH CHETTY VS. FEROZ KHANOON [LAWS(MAD)-2010-8-102] [REFERRED TO]
P.M.MOHAMED MYDEEN VS. SAHUL HAMEED [LAWS(MAD)-2012-12-121] [REFERRED TO]
P.KUMARESAN VS. KALYANI [LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-293] [REFERRED TO]
M. RAJASEKARAN VS. T. HARICHANDRA LAL [LAWS(MAD)-2012-6-366] [REFERRED TO]
SARLA GOEL VS. KISHAN CHAND [LAWS(SC)-2009-7-86] [REFERRED TO]
IMDAD ALI VS. KESHAV CHAND [LAWS(SC)-2003-2-17] [REFERRED]
T. RAVI & ANR. VS. B. CHINNA NARASIMHA [LAWS(SC)-2017-3-22] [REFERRED TO]
GOVINDARAJALU NAIDU VS. VADUGANATHAN (DECEASED) RAMESH [LAWS(MAD)-2011-2-295] [REFERRED TO]
MANJIT SINGH VS. VIRENDRA SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2019-10-246] [REFERRED TO]
PUNITA SAHNI VS. KAILASH SETHI [LAWS(DLH)-2009-9-242] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA KUMAR VS. P V KRISHNAM RAJU [LAWS(APH)-2003-11-52] [REFERRED TO]
SAROJ TRIPATHI VS. GURU PRASAD [LAWS(ALL)-2011-12-184] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN PRAKASH SAHA VS. ASIT BARAN DE & ANR. [LAWS(CAL)-2016-12-30] [REFERRED TO]
GULAM MOHAMMAD ANSARI VS. IIIRD ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE [LAWS(ALL)-2004-1-161] [REFERRED TO]
PARVEZ VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2008-4-208] [REFERRED TO]
KARTHIYAYANI VS. S N D P SAKHA YOGAM [LAWS(KER)-2004-9-8] [REFERRED TO]
R.MANOHARAN VS. CHANDRALEKHA [LAWS(MAD)-2012-11-226] [REFERRED TO]
P.V.NATESAN VS. MOHAMMED ISMAIL [LAWS(MAD)-2012-12-200] [REFERRED TO]
GUNALAN VS. S MURUGAMANICKAM [LAWS(MAD)-2012-4-91] [REFERRED TO]
A. RAJU VS. T.S. KRISHNAMURTHY [LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-535] [REFERRED TO]
B BALAKRISHNAN VS. M CHEZHIEYAN [LAWS(MAD)-2014-8-344] [REFERRED]
KANTA DEVI VS. SHIV PARVATI MANDIR [LAWS(MPH)-2007-3-51] [REFERRED TO]
UJJWAL SAHRAWAT VS. AJAY GARMENTS [LAWS(P&H)-2019-8-40] [REFERRED TO]
T K V S L MAHADEVAN VS. LATHIF MOOSA [LAWS(MAD)-2009-9-452] [REFERRED TO]
P M PUNNOOSE VS. K M MUNNERUDDI [LAWS(SC)-2003-7-9] [REFERRED]
AUTHORISED OFFICER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA VS. SHANMUGAVELU [LAWS(SC)-2024-2-1] [REFERRED TO]
GAUTAM GAMBHIR VS. JAI AMBAY TRADERS & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2020-8-44] [REFERRED TO]
KONDURI VEKATA HARINADHA BABU VS. VISWANADHUNI HARI KOTESWARA RAO [LAWS(APH)-2024-7-48] [REFERRED TO]
JOEL AVELINO NORONHA AND ORS. VS. FRANCISCO XAVIER AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2016-2-84] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI BABOO ALIAS SURENDRA VS. SHRI JIVOTTAM KRISHNA NAIK [LAWS(BOM)-2016-6-93] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY AND ORS. VS. VIMLA RANI AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-10-84] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMED IZHAR ALI VS. OLIVE FOUNSECA DIED PER LRS [LAWS(APH)-2008-5-5] [REFERRED TO]
HAIDER ABBAS VS. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE [LAWS(ALL)-2005-11-1] [REFERRED TO]
KUSMA DEVI VS. RISHI KUMAR [LAWS(ALL)-2008-8-286] [REFERRED TO]
ROSY MANWINDRA VS. AUDHUT GOVIND TILVE [LAWS(BOM)-2018-8-168] [REFERRED TO]
K. J. VARGHESE VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-8-371] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. TRINITY INFRASTRUCTURE VS. STATE OF M. P. [LAWS(MPH)-2020-9-151] [REFERRED TO]
AVTAR SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2011-11-105] [REFERRED TO]
S ARUL VS. VENKATARAMAN [LAWS(MAD)-2012-7-276] [REFERRED TO]
S. KALAIMANI VS. N. SADASIVAM [LAWS(MAD)-2023-2-263] [REFERRED TO]
REKHA DEVI VS. BUNIYAD HUSSAIN [LAWS(UTN)-2015-7-52] [REFERRED]
NATIONAL SPOT EXCHANGE LIMITED VS. MR. ANIL KOHLI, RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL FOR DUNAR FOODS LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-2021-9-38] [REFERRED TO]
NOVA ADS VS. METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION [LAWS(SC)-2014-12-58] [REFERRED TO]
MONOJ LAL SEAL AND ORS. VS. OCTAVIOUS TEA AND INDUSTRIES LTD. [LAWS(SC)-2015-4-94] [REFERRED TO]
KHUBI RAM ALIAS AZAD MANTOO VS. VIITH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AZAMGARH [LAWS(ALL)-2009-4-146] [REFERRED TO]
SARFARAJ AHMED VS. SANGEETA GHOSH @ SANGEETA MULLICK [LAWS(CAL)-2017-6-94] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRAKASH JAISWAL VS. RAJWATI [LAWS(ALL)-2012-8-230] [REFERRED TO]
RAFAT NAGHMI VS. ANJUMAN LSLAMIA MUSLIM YATEEM KHANA [LAWS(ALL)-2011-4-182] [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA VS. VIITH ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE BARABANKI [LAWS(ALL)-2011-2-134] [REFERRED TO]
B. D. KHANNA PUBLICITY VS. JALVEEN ROSHA [LAWS(DLH)-2022-7-208] [REFERRED TO]
HANS RAJ KHIMTA VS. KANWALJEET KAUR [LAWS(HPH)-2016-2-19] [REFERRED TO]
M DOSS VS. A SANKAR [LAWS(MAD)-2010-8-453] [REFERRED TO]
C VENKATESH VS. M/S VEL BEDS [LAWS(MAD)-2010-8-632] [REFERRED TO]
T THANGAMANI VS. MANGAMMAL REP BY HER POWER AGENT MRS V KANCHANA [LAWS(MAD)-2010-8-678] [REFERRED]
KRISHNAN N LALWANI VS. INDIA HOUSEBY ITS PARTNER C S JAFAR ALI [LAWS(MAD)-2006-2-264] [REFERRED TO]
A RAMAKRISHNAN VS. G CHANDRAMOHAN [LAWS(MAD)-2012-8-31] [REFERRED TO]
NANKACHI ENTERPRISES, VS. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AND ORS [LAWS(MAD)-2013-9-357] [REFERRED]
R Angappan VS. A G Srinivasan [LAWS(MAD)-2003-8-50] [REFERRED TO]
R Mittalal Jain VS. Johny DCouta [LAWS(MAD)-2004-4-49] [REFERRED TO]
K SURESH BABU VS. N GOVINDARAJAN [LAWS(MAD)-2018-4-804] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Arun Kumar, J. - (1.)These appeals are directed against a common judgment dated 24-12-1999 of the High Court disposing of two Revision Petitions. Briefly the facts giving rise to the present appeals are that the appellant was a tenant in the suit premises since before its purchase by the respondent-landlords. In May 1990, by mutual consent of the parties rent of the suit premises was enhanced to Rs. 500/- per month. Admittedly, rent up to October, 1990 was received by the landlords, thereafter as per the case of the respondents, tenant defaulted in payment of rent. The appellant filed suit for injunction in the Civil Court praying that the landlords be restrained from threatening to dispossess the appellant from suit premises. In the said suit, an interim injunction was granted in favour of the appellant. On 1st November, 1993, the landlords issued a default notice alleging that the tenant had committed default in payment of rent and was, therefore, liable to eviction. The tenant replied to the said notice on 20th November, 1993 denying any default on his part in payment of rent. Ultimately, on 7th February, 1994, an eviction petition was filed before the Rent Controller by the landlords on two grounds viz., (i) default in payment of rent and (ii) personal need of the landlords for occupying the premises.
(2.)On 15th March, 1994, the tenant made an application under Section 8(5) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act), 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), for permission to deposit the amount of rent in Court. The Rent Controller allowed the said application vide order dated 25th April, 1995. The Eviction Petition filed by the landlords was dismissed on the same date. The Rent Controller held that it could not be said that tenant had committed default in payment of rent. The Rent Controller further observed that even assuming there was default on the part of the tenant, it could not be said to be willful default, therefore, the eviction petition was dismissed. No finding was given on the second ground for eviction regarding personal need of the landlords for occupying the premises. The landlords filed appeals before the Rent Control Appellate Authority against both the orders of the Rent Controller. Both the appeals were allowed by the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority held that the tenant had committed default in payment of rent. It relied on admission on the part of the tenant himself as available in the evidence of the tenant that at least from May, 1993, no rent had been paid. The tenant is said to have deposited the rent in Court during the pendency of the proceedings. However, the question for consideration before the Appellate Authority was whether the tenant had committed default in payment of rent The Appellate Authority held that the tenant had committed default, and therefore, the eviction petition was allowed. It was observed by the Appellate Authority that even after the petition had been filed by the landlords, the tenant did not think of offering the rent to the landlords. Further the tenant did not issue notice as required under S. 8(2) of the Act calling upon the landlords to notify the Bank where the tenant could make the deposit of rent. On the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Authority held that the tenant had committed default in payment of rent, and therefore, the eviction petition was allowed. No finding was however recorded on the second ground of eviction. Based on the failure of the tenant to follow procedure and deposit rent of suit property under S. 8(2) of the Act it was held that the tenant having failed to comply with the procedure prescribed in that behalf under the Act the decree for eviction had to follow. The tenant filed Civil Revision Petitions against both the orders of the Rent Control Appellate Authority in the High Court. Both the revision petitions were dismissed by the High Court vide the impugned judgment dated 24-12-1999. Hence the present appeals by the tenant.
(3.)The sole question for consideration in these appeals is whether the provisions of Section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act), 1960 are to be strictly complied with by the tenant before he can seek benefit under the said provisions regarding deposit of rent in the Court. In this connection, relevant provisions of Section 8 of the Act need to be quoted:
"Section 8 : [Landlord liable to give receipt for rent or advance] :
Sub-section
(1) **********

(2) Where a landlord refuses to accept, or evades the receipt of, any rent lawfully payable to him by a tenant in respect of any building, the tenant may, by notice in writing, require the landlord to specify within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice by him, a bank into which the rent may be deposited by the tenant, to the credit of the landlord.

Provided that such bank shall be one situated in the city, town or village in which the building is situated or if there is no such bank in such city, town or village, within (five kilometers) of the limits thereof.

Explanation. It shall be open to the landlord to specify from time to time by a written notice to the tenant and subject to the proviso aforesaid, a bank different from the one already specified by him under this sub-section.

(3) If the landlord specifies a bank as aforesaid, the tenant shall deposit the rent in the bank and shall continue to deposit in it any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building.

(4) If the landlord does not specify a bank as aforesaid, the tenant shall remit the rent to the landlord by Money Order, after deducting the money order commission.

(5) If the landlord refuses to receive the rent remitted by Money Order under sub-section (4), the tenant may deposit the rent before the Controller and continue to deposit with him any rent which may subsequently become due in respect of the building."



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.