CRP No. 1696 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-03-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRP No. 1696 of 2026 and CMP.No.7798 of 2026 1. K.Ammer John S/o.Kassim, Proprietor of A.R.Rahaman Biriyani A/c Restaurant, Res.at No.109, Thambu Chetty St, Mannady, Chennai 001. Carrying on Business at Door No.5, Andiappan St, Govindan Road, West mambalam, Chennai 33 Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Amitharaj S/o.Abraham Nadar, No.10/23, Kodambakkam Road, 1st Floor, Mettupalayam, Chennai 33 Respondent(s) PRAYER To set aside the fair and decretal order dated 5.3.2026 made in MP.No.2/2026 in RLTOP.NO.635/2025 on the file of the XV Small Causes Court, Chennai. For Petitioner(s): MR.N.Naganathan For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Venkadesh Kumar https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 1696 of 2026 ORDER Challenging the impugned order passed in M.P. No.2 of 2026 in RLTOP.NO.635/2025 on the file of the XV Small Causes Court, Chennai, the tenant has preferred this revision. 2. Before the Trial Court, the petitioner filed an application seeking leave to cross-examine the landlord. The Trial Court dismissed the application by relying the ratio laid down by this Hon’ble Court in The Proprietor, Bhavani Fancy Store Vs. M/s. Mayur Promotors Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2025(1) CTC 281, wherein it was held that the grant of permission to cross-examination is a matter within the discretion of the Court. It was further held that the jural relationship between the landlord and tenant is admitted and that there is no registered tenancy agreement between the parties. Hence, the Court declined the request for cross-examination. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there exists a subsequent agreement under which an additional advance of Rs.4,75,000/- was paid, and therefore, cross-examination is necessary. He also contended that the provisions of the new Act would not apply to the facts of the case. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 1696 of 2026 4. The respondent opposed the same, contending that eviction proceedings have been initiated under Section 21(2)(a) of the new Act due to arrears of rent. Admittedly, the jural relationship is not in dispute and there is no registered tenancy agreement as required under Section 4(2) of the TNRRRLT Act. 5. The Trial Court has rightly exercised its discretion and relied upon the settled legal principles. This Court finds no merit in the revision, and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 24-03-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No rri https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 1696 of 2026 To 1.The XV Small Causes Court, Chennai. 2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Madras, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 1696 of 2026 T.V.THAMILSELVI J. rri CRP No. 1696 of 2026 24-03-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis