Synopsis

This judgment by the Madras High Court arises from a civil revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, challenging an order dismissing an application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner in a rent control eviction proceeding. The tenant sought the commissioner to inspect the premises to disprove the landlord's claim that the building was old and dilapidated. The court dismissed the revision, holding that under the new Tamil Nadu Rent Control Act of 2017, the age and condition of the building are irrelevant when the landlord seeks eviction for the purpose of demolition and reconstruction. The court emphasized that the landlord's bona fide intention to demolish and reconstruct is the sole determining factor, and the tenant cannot obstruct such a genuine requirement through procedural applications.

C.R.P. No. 1507 of 2023

Court: High Court of Judicature at Madras
Coram: R. Sakthivel, J.
Date of Judgment: March 27, 2026
Citation: 2026:MHC:1269
Core Law: Rent Control Law, Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017

2. Legal Framework

• Constitutional Law: Article 227 of the Constitution of India, which confers supervisory jurisdiction on High Courts over subordinate courts.

• Rent Control Law: Sections 21(2)(e) and 26 of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Tena

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.