C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on : 05.11.2025

Pronounced on : 05.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

Faisal Khan ..Plaintiff

Vs

Leena Paulose

Proprietrix-M/s.The Nail Artistry

New Door No.176, Eldams Road

Teynampet, Chennai-600 018

Presently lodged in Mandoli Prison

Mangal Pandey Marg, Harsh Vihar

Mandoli, New Delhi 110 093. ..Defendant.

Prayer : Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Madras High Court

O.S.Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C., praying to pass a judgment and

decree in favour of the plaintiff :-

a) directing the defendant to handover vacant possession of the Schedule

Mentioned Property to the Plaintiff;

b) Directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff, a sum of Rs.1,54,04,334/-

towards rental arrears of Rs.1,31,63,334/- from 01.07.2021 till 28.06.2023

along with interest of Rs.22,41,000/- at 18% per annum from the due date till

28.06.2023;

c) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs.1,17,88,084/-

towards damages of Rs.1,04,13,334/- for unlawful use and occupation from

1/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

01.12.2021 to 28.06.2023 along with interest of Rs.13,74,750/- at 18% per

annum from the due date till 28.06.2023;

d) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs.49,07,595/-

towards GST of Rs.42,43,800/- from 01.07.2021 to 28.06.2023 along with

interest of Rs.6,63,795/- at 18% per annum from the due date till 28.06.2023;

e) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff future mesne profits

towards damages for illegal use and occupation of the schedule mentioned

property from 29.06.2023 till the date of handing over of possession at the

monthly rent of Rs.11,00,000/- per monthly;

f) directing the defendant to pay future interest at the rate of 18% on the

rental arrears of Rs.1,31,63,334/- being the principal sum from 29.06.2023 till

the date of actual realisation;

g)directing the defendant to pay future interest at 18% per annum on the

damages for unlawful use and occupation amount to Rs.1,04,13,334/- being the

principal sum from 29.06.2023 till the date of actual realisation;

h) directing the defendant to pay future interest at 18% per annum on the

GST of Rs.42,43,800/- being the principal sum from 29.06.2023 till the date of

actual realisation;

i)grant the costs of the suit; and

j) pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and

proper in the interests of justice.

*********

For Plaintiff : Mr.K.M.Aasim Shehazd

for M/s.B.F.S. Legal

For Respondent: Mr.K.S.Ilangovan

for M/s.Achari and Antoni Associates.

2/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

JUDGMENT

The present suit has been filed for the following reliefs:-

a) directing the defendant to handover vacant possession of the Schedule

Mentioned Property to the Plaintiff;

b) Directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff, a sum of Rs.1,54,04,334/-

towards rental arrears of Rs.1,31,63,334/- from 01.07.2021 till 28.06.2023

along with interest of Rs.22,41,000/- at 18% per annum from the due date till

28.06.2023;

c) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs.1,17,88,084/-

towards damages of Rs.1,04,13,334/- for unlawful use and occupation from

01.12.2021 to 28.06.2023 along with interest of Rs.13,74,750/- at 18% per

annum from the due date till 28.06.2023;

d) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs.49,07,595/-

towards GST of Rs.42,43,800/- from 01.07.2021 to 28.06.2023 along with

interest of Rs.6,63,795/- at 18% per annum from the due date till 28.06.2023;

e) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff future mesne profits

towards damages for illegal use and occupation of the schedule mentioned

property from 29.06.2023 till the date of handing over of possession at the

monthly rent of Rs.11,00,000/- per monthly;

f)directing the defendant to pay future interest at the rate of 18% on the

rental arrears of Rs.1,31,63,334/- being the principal sum from 29.06.2023 till

the date of actual realisation;

g)directing the defendant to pay future interest at 18% per annum on the

damages for unlawful use and occupation amount to Rs.1,04,13,334/- being the

3/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

principal sum from 29.06.2023 till the date of actual realisation;

h) directing the defendant to pay future interest at 18% per annum on the

GST of Rs.42,43,800/- being the principal sum from 29.06.2023 till the date of

actual realisation;

i)grant the costs of the suit.

2. The averments made in the plaint are as follows:-

(a) The plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property situated in

Old.Nos.40/1, 40/A, 40/B, New Door No.176, Eldams Road, Teynampet,

Chennai-600 018 admeasuring 3361 sq.ft., comprised in R.S.No.1548/7, block

No.30, Mylapore, Chennai, more fully described in the schedule of property.

(b) In the year 2019, the defendant approached the plaintiff to take on

lease the schedule mentioned premises for a period of 5 years for commercial

purposes. The defendant assured the plaintiff that she would be prompt in

payment of monthly rents. The plaintiff agreed and the schedule mentioned

properties was leased to the defendant for a period of 5 years vide Lease Deed

dated 07.03.2019 for carrying on her commercial activities. The monthly rent

was fixed at Rs.5,50,000/- with effect from 07.03.2019 with a provision for

enhancement by 12% after 3 years. GST was payable by the defendant which

was in addition to the monthly rents.

(c) Post the execution of the Rental Agreement on 07.03.2019, the rented

4/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

premises (Schedule mentioned property) was handed over to the defendant. The

tenancy commenced from 07.03.2019 and the defendant promised to pay the

rent in full on the 5

th

day of every succeeding English calendar month. The

defendant paid monthly rents from 01.05.2019 till 30.06.2021. Since

01.07.2021, the defendant has been a wilful and chronic defaulter in payment of

monthly rents. The plaintiff states that as per Clause 19 of the rental agreement,

if the tenant fails to pay rent for three consecutive months, the landlord may

terminate the tenancy without giving any notice.

(d) In terms of Clause 19 of the Rental Agreement, the plaintiff issued a

notice dated 23.11.2021 terminating the tenancy of the defendant with

immediate effect. The defendant was called upon to hand over keys of the

schedule mentioned premises to the plaintiff's representative Mr.Shakeel Sheikh

on 1

st

December 2021. The Defendant was also informed about the criminal

proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate against her. The notice

was delivered to the defendant on 25.11.2021.

(e) The defendant issued a reply dated 29.11.2021 containing vague

statements and baseless averments and suppressed her wilful and default in

payment of monthly rents and sidestepped the issue of rental arrears and

brushed aside the criminal case.

(f) The plaintiff issued a rejoinder dated 06.01.2022 stating that an FIR

has been registered against the defendant by the Enforcement Directorate in a

5/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

Rs.200 crore money laundering case. The Enforcement Directorate has stated

that the defendant is a master con woman, strategist as well as the brain and key

factor behind the schemes created to launder the proceeds of crime. The

defendant and her husband Sukesh Chandrashekar have conspired and colluded

to cheat many innocents. The defendant was informed that she is in default and

on account of other illegalities, she was called upon to hand over vacant

possession of the premises immediately, failing which, the plaintiff would be

constrained to seek appropriate relief in accordance with law.

(g) That notice was delivered on 07.01.2022; even after receipt of notice,

the defendant has taken no steps to clear the rental arrears. It is further stated

that after the commencement of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and

Responsibilities of the Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 [hereinafter called as

“TNRRRLT Act”] on 22.02.2019, all tenancies must be compulsorily

registered. However, the defendant failed to come forward to register the

tenancy. Hence, the plaintiff filed an application bearing

No.TN-242022012105400 with the Rent Authority for registration of the rental

agreement dated 07.03.2019 and grant of T.R.No., on 21.01.2022. However,

the said application was kept pending by the Rent Authority.

(h) The plaintiff filed R.L.T.O.P. S.R.No.1901 of 2022 before the X

Court of Small Causes at Chennai on 17.03.2022. However, the said RLTOP

was returned on the ground that since the tenancy between the parties has not

6/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

been registered and since a T.R.No., has not been issued by the Rent Authority,

the petition cannot be numbered.

(i) On 27.09.2022, the defendant sent a letter to the plaintiff admitting

default of monthly rent since 01.07.2021 and promising to handover vacant

possession of the schedule mentioned property by 10.12.2022. The defendant

failed to honor her own commitment of handing over vacant possession of the

premises on 10.12.2022 and in contrary to her undertaking, the defendant filed

O.S.No.8456 of 2022 alleging that the plaintiff has resorted to unlawful means

to evict the defendant and sought for permanent injunction restraining the

Plaintiff from evicting the defendant except by due process of law. The plaintiff

filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure to

reject the Plaint.

(j) Even after receipt of the notice dated 23.11.2021 terminating the

tenancy, the defendant failed to handover possession and continues to be in

illegal possession of the schedule mentioned property and carrying on her

commercial operations and monetising therefrom. Therefore, the defendant is

liable to pay double the fixed monthly rent i.e., Rs.5,50,000 x 2 =

Rs.11,00,000/- towards damages for unlawful use and occupation from

01.12.2021.

(k) The defendant has been lodged in Mandoli Prison, however, she

continues to run the business under the name of Nail Artistry from the Schedule

7/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

mentioned property through her staff.

3. The defendant has filed a written statement. The crux of the written

statement is that, the defendant at the time of entering into the rental agreement

was informed that the property is 3537 sq.ft. But the Plaintiff now pleads that

the property is only 3361 sq ft. Hence, the excess rent collected by the plaintiff

has to be refunded. There is no rental arrears as on date and the plaintiff is

regularly collecting the rent in cash without issuing any rental receipt. She has

been falsely implicated in the FIR filed by the Enforcement Directorate. The

notice with regard to the present proceedings is not served. Suit requires to be

contested as a regular suit since the agreement is not a registered agreement.

The title deed of the property which stands in the name of the Plaintiff was not

filed by the Plaintiff to prove his ownership over the property.

4. The trial commenced after framing of the following issues in the

present suit.

1.Whether the plaintiff is entitled to get vacant possession

of the Schedule mentioned property from the defendant?

2. Whether the defendant is liable to pay rental arrears

along with interest @ 18% per annum as sought for in the

plaint?

8/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

3. Whether the defendant is liable to pay damages for

unlawful use and occupation along with interest @ 18% per

annum as sought for in the plaint?

4. Whether the defendant is liable to pay the amount

which was spent towards GST along with interest at 18% per

annum as sought for in the plaint?

5. Whether the defendant is liable to pay future mesne

profits towards damages for illegal use and occupation of the

schedule mentioned property as sought for in the plaint?

6. Whether the defendant is liable to pay future interest @

18% on the rental arrears as sought for in the plaint?

7. Whether the defendant is liable to pay future interest at

18% per annum on the damages for unlawful use and

occupation as sought for in the plaint?

8. Whether the defendant is liable to pay future interest at

18% per annum on the GST?

9. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the costs of the suit?

10. What other relief the plaintiff is entitled to?

5. On the side of the plaintiff, the plaintiff was examined as P.W.1 and

Exhibits P.1 to P.15 were marked. On the side of the defendant, the defendant

was examined as DW1. Ex.X.1 was also marked.

6. Heard both sides and perused the records carefully.

9/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

7. The learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that based on a Rental

Agreement entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant on 07.03.2019,

which was marked as Ex.P.2, the monthly rent was fixed as Rs.5,50,000/- and

the lease was for a period of 5 years commencing from 07.03.2019 to

07.03.2025. The plaintiff's case is that the defendant failed to make payment of

the rent from July 2021. Clause 6 and 19 of the rental agreement dated

07.03.2019 are relevant and are extracted as under:-

“6. That the tenancy is for a duration of five years lock in

period commencing from 07.03.2019 ending with 07.03.2025

when the rental agreement shall expire where upon the premises

shall be vacated by the Tenant possession delivered to the

Landlord.

...

19. If the tenant fails to pay the rent for three months

consecutively to the Landlord, the landlord may terminate the

tenancy without giving any notice.”

As the defendant has not paid the rent from July 2021, legal notice dated

23.11.2021 which was marked as Ex.P.3 was issued to the defendant which was

duly received by the defendant. The defendant gave a reply notice dated

29.11.2021 to the termination notice dated 23.11.2021 (which was marked as

Ex.P.4) , wherein, the defendant denied the contents of the legal notice.

Thereafter, the plaintiff issued a rejoinder dated 06.01.2022 to the reply given

by the defendant which was marked as Ex.P.5. Subsequently, the defendant had

10/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

written a letter to the plaintiff on 27.09.2022 informing that the defendant

would vacate the premises as the defendant is unable to pay the rent.

8. The learned counsel for the plaintiff would further submit that the

defendant has committed default in payment of rent from July 2021 and is in

unlawful possession of the schedule premises. Therefore, the Plaintiff is

entitled to the reliefs sought in the present Suit.

9. The learned counsel for the plaintiff, in support of his contentions, has

relied upon the following decisions:

1.Ratheesh Vs V.S.Mary 2023/KER/55491.

2.Sengappan Vs. Arumbatha V eda Vinayagar Temple 2000-L.W.

3.Javer Chand and Ors Vs Pukhraj Surana AIR 1961 SC 1655

4.Mohammed Munvar V S N.C.Nesan and Ors.

5.Paramasivan Vs. Pandian MANU/TN/1363/2016

6.Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs Sudera Realty Private Limited

2022 SCC Online 1161

7. M/s.Southern Triple A Investments Pvt Ltd Vs. M/s.OMNE Agate

Systems Pvt. Ltd [Civil Suit No.838 of 2010]

8.Thangam and Another Vs Navamani Ammal 2024 INSC 164.

9. Dr.H.K.Sharma Vs Shri Ram Lal [Civil Appeal no.1237-1238 of

11/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

2019.

10. Kamlesh Kushwaha Vs Vibha Kumar MANU/MP/1179/2022.

11. Kishorbhai Vs Gandubhai Pethani Vs Stte of Gujart and Anr.

2013 SCC Omline 1179.

10. The learned counsel for the plaintiff would submit that in the case of

Ratheesh Vs V.S.Mary reported in 2023/KER/55491, the Kerala High Court

discussed about the effect of the document marked without objection during

Trial Stage. In the said decision, in para 20, it is held as follows:

“20. Another question arises is the legal effect of marking a

document without objection.

21. In the decision of Javer Chand Vs. Pukhraj Surana, AIR

1961 SC 1655, a Four Bench decision of the Apex Court considered

he validity of an instrument which had not been duly stamped and

held that when a question as to the admissibility of a document is

raised on the ground that it has not been stamped or has not been

properly stamped, it has to be decided then and there when the

document would be tendered in evidence. Once the court rightly or

wrongly decided to admit the document in evidence, so far as the

parties are concerned, the matter is closed. It has further held that

once a document had been admitted in evidence, as aforesaid, it is

not open either to the trial court itself or to the court of appeal or

revision to go behind that order.”

Therefore, in the present case, the defendant cannot argue that Ex.P8 cannot be

12/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

relied upon by the Plaintiff for the reasons that once the court rightly or

wrongly decided to admit the document in evidence, so far as the parties are

concerned, the matter is closed.

11. In Segappan Vs. Arumbatha Veda Vinayagar Temple case [2000-1-

L.W], it is held that unregistered lease deed to prove the creation of a lease by

oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession.

12. In Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs. Sudera Realty Private

Limited [2022 SCC Online SC 1161] , it is held that Tenant who continues to

occupy the premises after termination of tenancy is a trespasser and is liable to

compensate for unlawful use and occupation.

13. In M/s.Southern Triple A Investments Pvt Ltd Vs. M/s.OMNE Agate

Systems Pvt Ltd [Civil Suit No.838 of 2010] it is held that Landlord who is

deprived of his legitimate rental income due to tenant's default is entitled to

interest on the outstanding rent even if the rental agreement did not provide for

payment of interest.

14. In Kamlesh Kushwaha Vs. Vibha Kumar [MANU/MP/1179/2022] it

is held that in the absence of pleadings no evidence can be looked into and vice

13/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

versa. In Kishorbhai Gandhubhai Pethani Vs. State of Gujarat and another

[2013 SCC Online SC 1179], it is held that perjury strikes at the root of the

justice delivery system and disturbs the accuracy of the findings recorded.

15. Per contra, the learned counsel for the defendant contended that there

is a difference in the extent of property as per the agreement and the patta;

therefore, once there is no clarity with regard to the extent of the property, the

plaintiff cannot seek recovery of possession and damages. The learned counsel

for the defendant had relied upon the question and answer posted to the plaintiff

in the cross examination:

Q10: What is the total extent of the property leased out to the

defendant?

A: 3537 sq.f.t

Q11: But you own only 3361 sq.ft.

A: There is always a difference between the measurement in patta

and the sale deed.

A12: To what extent is the rent fixed?

A: The rent is paid for 3537 sq.ft.

Q13: I put it to you that you are not entitled collect rent for the extent

of 3537 sq.ft.

A: I deny.

The learned counsel for the defendant contended that unless a proper survey is

made for the property which is rented out to the defendant, the suit cannot be

14/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

decided.

16. The learned counsel for the defendant submitted that the defendant

was in incarceration from September 2021 and the Advocate Commission

appointed by this court recorded the evidence of the defendant in the course of

trial. The learned counsel further contended that an advance of Rs.5 lakhs was

paid as a security deposit and in the absence of valid termination by the

plaintiff, institution of suit for recovery of possession was bad in law.

17. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the defendant

that the rental agreement is an unregistered document. Unless it is registered as

per Section 49 of the Registration Act, the plaintiff cannot seek the reliefs

sought in the present Suit.

Issue Nos.1 & 2: 18. The plaintiff has demonstrated his case by

producing the rental agreement which was entered into between the plaintiff

and the defendant for a fixed term of 5 years from 07.03.2019 to 07.03.2025

and the validity of the agreement itself has came to an end on 07.03.2025.

Without any extension specifically agreed between the plaintiff and the

defendant, the defendant has no right to stay in the said premises as the

agreement has come to an end.

18. Th18. The plaintiff has demonstrated his case by producing the rental

agreement which was entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant for a

15/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

fixed term of 5 years from 07.03.2019 to 07.03.2025 and the validity of the

19. That apart, there is no evidence produced by the defendant to

establish that the rent was paid upto date and in the absence of any document or

even a suggestion during the cross examination with regard to payment of

arrears of rent by the defendant to the plaintiff, the court cannot come to the

conclusion that the defendant has paid the rent as per the agreement.

20. It is the clear case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff has issued

termination notice dated 23.11.2021 which has been duly delivered to the

defendant and a reply was also given by the defendant denying all the contents

of the notice. The plaintiff has issued a rejoinder to the defendant which was

marked as Ex.P.5 and thereafter, a letter has been sent by the plaintiff to the

defendant stating that she is willing to vacate the premises. In such

circumstances, the defendant cannot now run contra and state that the claim for

arrears of rent is a fraudulent one. Further, during cross examination, the

defendant had admitted that she has not paid the rent from August 2021 as she

was in prison. The relevant portion of the cross examination of the defendant is

extracted hereunder:

Q 18: When were you arrested by the ED?

A : I was arrested in Oct. 2021.

Q 22: Since when you have not been able to pay the

rents?

16/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

A : August, 2021 when I arrested by the EOW.

A reading of the above answers given by the Defendant during cross

examination establishes the case of the Plaintiff that the Defendant has

defaulted in payment of rent.

21. Admittedly, the premises is rented for commercial purpose and the

defendant occupied it. In such circumstances, it is unnecessary to go into the

issues relating to the extent of property as the defendant agreed to pay the rent

specified in the agreement. This court cannot come to the conclusion that the

defendant has paid the rent by way of cash payment as the defendant failed to

produce supporting materials and oral evidence to establish her averments. In

view of the above, Issue Nos.1 & 2 are answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

22. One of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the

defendant is that the Plaintiff has relied upon a letter written by the defendant to

the plaintiff regarding vacating the premises which was marked as Ex.P.8. It is

contended that the defendant was in prison at that point of time and the said

letter does not contain any seal or authorisation from the Prison Authorities.

Therefore, the same cannot be relied upon. Though this argument inspires

confidence, it is to be noted that, at the time of trial, there was no cross

examination of the plaintiff with regard to the admissibility or credibility of the

17/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

letter 27.09.2022 (Ex.P8)) from the defendant's side. In the absence of any

specific question or even a suggestion during cross examination of the Plaintiff,

such an argument of the defendant's counsel cannot be taken into consideration.

Therefore, the said argument is negatived.

Issue Nos.3 to 10

23. While considering Issue Nos.3 to 8, it is to be noted that, the

defendant having failed to pay rent, had occupied the schedule property and

continued to run her business. Even after termination of the rental agreement

and institution of legal proceedings by the Plaintiff, the defendant had chosen

not to clear the arrears of rent and handover vacant possession. It is clear that

the defendant is in unlawful occupation of the schedule property for years

together which resulted in irreparable loss and hardship to the Plaintiff.

Accordingly, Issue Nos. 3 to 8 are also answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

24. In view of the above observations and by considering the facts and

circumstances of the present case, this Court is not inclined to grant the costs of

the Suit and the Plaintiff is not entitled to any other relief. Issue Nos.9 & 10 are

answered accordingly.

25(a) The Defendant is directed to handover vacant possession of the schedule

mentioned property to the Plaintiff; the defendant is directed to pay a sum of

18/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

Rs.1,54,04,334/- towards rental arrears of Rs.1,31,63,334/- from 01.07.2021 till

28.06.2023 along with interest of Rs.22,41,000/- at 18% interest per annum

from the due date till 28.06.2023; the defendant is directed to pay the plaintiff a

sum of Rs.1,17,88,084/- towards damages of Rs.1,04,13,334/- for unlawful use

and occupation from 01.12.2021 to 28.06.2023 along with interest of

Rs.13,74,750/- at 18% per annum from the due date till 28.06.2023; the

defendant is directed to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs.49,07,595/- towards GST

of Rs.42,43,800/- from 01.07.2021 to 28.06.2023 along with interest of

Rs.6,63,795/- at 18% per annum from the due date till 28.06.2023. 5(a). ith

interest of Rs.6,63,795/- at 18% per annum from the due date till 28.06.2023

25(b). Further, the defendant is directed to pay future interest at the

rate of 18% on the rental arrears of Rs.1,31,63,334/- being the principal sum

from 29.06.2023 till the date of actual realisation; the defendant is directed to

pay future interest at 18% per annum on the damages for unlawful use and

occupation amounting to Rs.1,04,13,334/- being the principal sum from

29.06.2023 till the date of actual realisation; the defendant is directed to pay

future interest at 18% per annum on the GST of Rs.42,43,800/- being the

principal sum from 29.06.2023 till the date of actual realisation, within a period

of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Though, a

future mesne profits towards damages for illegal use and occupation of the

schedule mentioned property from 29.06.2023 till the date of handing over of

19/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

possession at the monthly rent of Rs.11,00,000/- per month is claimed, by the

Plaintiff, the said claim is rejected as it is without any basis.

26. In the result, the Civil Suit is decreed to the extent indicated above.

No costs.

05.01.2026

(½)

ANNEXURE

Plaintiff side witness: P.W.1 Faisal Khan

Documents exhibited by the plaintiff:

S.NoExhibit Dated Description of the document

1. Ex.P.1. 12.01.2018Sale deed in favour Mr.Faisal B.Khan

2. Ex.P.2 07.03.2019Rental Agreement

3. Ex.P.323.11.2021Notice sent by the plaintiff to the defendant.

4. Ex.P.429.11.2021Reply notice sent by the defendant to the plaintiff

5. Ex.P.506.01.2022Rejoinder Notice sent by the plaintiff to the defendant

6. Ex.P.622.01.2022Application bearing No.TN-242022012105400

filed for registration of Rental Agreement dated 07.03.2019

7 Ex.P.7March 2022RLTOP.SR.No.1901 of 2022 filed by the plaintiff against

the Defendant under Section 21(2)(a) and 21(2)(b) of the

TNRRRLT Act

8 Ex.P.827.09.2022Letter sent by the defendant to the plaintiff.

9 Ex.P.917.11.2022 Petition and Affidavit filed by the Plaintiff in

W.P.No.31539 of 2022

10 Ex.P.1025.11.2022Order passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in

W.P.No.31539 of 2022

11 Ex.P.1101.12.2022Plaint in O.S.No.8546 of 2022 filed by the defendant

12 Ex.P.1201.12.2022I.A.No.3 of 2023 in O.S.No.8546 of 2022 filed by the

defendant.

13 Ex.P.1315.12.2022Counter affidavit of the plaintiff in I.A.No.3 of 2023 in

O.S.No8546 of 2022

20/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

14 Ex.P.1420.12.2022I.A.No.4 of 2023 in O.S.No.8546 of 2022 filed by the

plaintiff.

15 Ex.P.1528.04.2023Order passed by the Rent Authority rejecting application

bearing No.TN-24202012105400 for registration of Rental

Agreement dated 07.03.2019.

Defendant side Witness : D.W.1 Leena Paulose

S.NoExhibit DatedDescription of the document

1. Ex.X.1. - GSTIN/UIN status of the Nail Artistry.

05.01.2026

(½)

Index:Yes

Neutral Citation:Yes

nvsri

21/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM DIV) No. 280 of 2023

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

nvsri

Pre-delivery Judgment in

C.S.(Com.Div) No.280 of 2023

05.01.2026

22/22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis