BRIJESH KUMAR, R.C.LAHOTI
J. J. Lal Private LTD. – Appellant
Versus
M. R. Murali – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R.C. Lahoti, J.-The landlord-respondents initiated proceedings for eviction of the tenant-appellants from the suit premises described as Door No. 244 and 264, Walltax Road, Chennai on the ground available under clause (1) of sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter, the Act for short), by applying to the Controller for a direction in that behalf. It was alleged in the application for eviction filed on 6th April, 1989 that the tenants did not pay the rent of premises Door No. 264 for January and February, 1989 at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month and for premises Door No. 244 for the month of February, 1989 at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per month. The tenants, in their written statement, denied their being defaulters and submitted that there was dispute as to the rate at which the rent was payable and also as to the quantum of arrears, though, they were agreeable and always prepared to pay the rent at which it was previously paid but for the exaggerated and inflated demand of the landlords.
2. It appears that the suit premises are owned by the Municipal Corporation of Chennai and are held by the landlords as allo
Firm Sriniwas Ram Kumar v. Mahabir Prasad and Ors.
Nagubai Ammal & Ors. v. B. Shama Rao & Ors.
Majati Subbarao v. P.V.K. Krishna Rao (Deceased) by LRs.
Hasmat Rai & Anr. v. Raghunath Prasad (1981) 3 SCC 103. (Para 15)
Om Prakash & Ors. v. Ram Kumar & Ors.
S. Sundaram Pillai etc. etc. v. V.R. Pattabiraman etc. etc.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.