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

1999 Supreme(SC) 952

S.N.PHUKAN, V.N.KHARE
T. Sivasubramaniam – Appellant
Versus
Kasinath Pujari – Respondent


Judgment

V.N. Khare, J.-The appellants herein are the landlords (hereinafter referred to as ‘the landlord’). The landlord filed a petition before the Rent Controller under Section 10(2)(ii)(a), 10(2)(vii) and 10(3)(a)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for eviction of the re­spondents-tenants from the premises. The respondents-tenants contested the said petition denying the alleged requirements of the landlord for the premises as bona fide. The Rent Controller allowed the petition filed by the landlord and ordered eviction of the tenants. The appeals preferred by the tenants were also rejected by the Appellate Authori­ty. However, the High Court in the revision petitions filed by the tenants set aside the orders of the two Courts below and allowed the revisions. The High Court was of the view that the landlord having not set out his need much less bona fide need for the premises in the petition, no order for eviction could have been passed against the tenants. It is against the said judgment of the High Court the land­lord is in appeal before us.

2. Challenge to the order under appeal is laid on twin grounds. The fi















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