SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(SC) 972

J.JAGANNADHA RAO, S.B.MAJMUDAR
Aundiappa Nadar – Appellant
Versus
Gnanambal Ammal – Respondent


Judgment

M. Jagannadha Rao, J.-Leave granted.

2. These two appeals have been preferred by the tenant against the judgment of the High Court of Madras dated 20.8.1996 in S.A. No. 1922 of 1984 and C.R.P. No. 4646 of 1984, reversing the judgment of the Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Madras dated 25.4.1982 in A.S. No. 225/81 and CMA No. 172/81 and restoring the judgment of the IInd Asst. Judge, City Civil Court, Madras dated 23.7.1980 in O.S. No. 2990 of 1970 and IA No. 12515 of 1970. The matters arise under the Tamil Nadu City Tenants’ Protection Act, 1921 (Act III of 1922) (hereinafter called the ‘Act’). That Act, as amended by Act 19/55, confers certain rights on the tenant of the land to purchase the same if he or his predecessor-in-interest has put up a structure before 12.9.55, on the leased land. On the facts of the case before us, the suit was filed in 1970 by the respondent and such a right was indeed available to the tenant as per the amendment by Act 19/55, provided the tenancy in land was created on or before 12.9.1955 and superstructure was also put up by the tenant before 12.9.1955 and before the tenancy of the land was terminated. Though the appellant in this case exe















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top