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

2002 Supreme(SC) 544

B.N.AGARWAL, R.C.LAHOTI
Abdul Kader – Appellant
Versus
G. D. Govindaraj – Respondent


ORDER

These are tenant s appeals by Special Leave against whom a decree for eviction from the suit premises has been passed on the ground available under clause (i) of sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter the Act , for short).

2. The relevant facts are not in controversy. The premises are held by the tenant under a written contract of lease dated 1.1.1989 whereby the rent for the premises has been agreed to at Rs. 100/- per month. Over and above, the amount of rent, the tenant has agreed to pay to the landlord a sum of Rs. 111/- equivalent to one half of the annual property tax payable in respect of the property. The tenant did not pay the rent due and payable for the months of January, February and March, 1990. The tenant had also not paid the amount due and payable on account of property tax @ Rs. 111/- for the years 1987-1988, 1988-1989 and 1998-1990. Here, it may be stated that even prior to 1.1.1989, the tenant was holding the premises under a previous deed of lease, the only difference being that earlier the rate of rent was Rs. 60/- per month, though, so far as the stipulation to pay the amount of property t








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