TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1067
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....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. 2. The averments made in the plaint....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (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 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 regis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecting 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? 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 ille....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le 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 2019. 10. Kamlesh Kushwaha Vs Vibha Kumar MANU/MP/1179/2022. 11. Kishorbhai Vs Gandubhai Pethani Vs Stte of Gujart and Anr. 2013 SCC O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a. 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 p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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? 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 t....