R.C.LAHOTI, BRIJESH KUMAR
S. Shanmugavel Nadar – Appellant
Versus
State Of T. N. – Respondent
ORDER
Leave granted.
2. Looking at the nature of the controversy arising for decision and the view which we propose to take of the matter before us, a detailed statement of the facts is not called for. We will briefly notice bare essential facts. The Madras City Tenants Protection (Amendment) Act, 1994 (Tamil Nadu Act 2 of 1996) was enacted by the State Legislature and came into force w.e.f. 11th January, 1996. The constitutional validity of this Act was put in issue by several writ petitions filed in the High Court. When the matter came up for hearing before the Division Bench reliance on behalf of the respondents in the High Court was placed on Division Bench decision of the High Court dated 25th January, 1972 reported as M. Varadaraja Pillai v. Salem Municipal Council, 85 Law Weekly 760.
3. Diverting a little in narration of facts it is necessary to note that at an earlier point of time the State Legislature had enacted the Madras City Tenants Protection (Amendment) Act, 1960 (Act No. 13 of 1960) whereby certain amendments were incorporated in the Madras City Tenants Protection Act, 1921. Constitutional validity of Act No. 13 of 1960 was challenged by filing several writ petitions
M/s. Rup Diamonds & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Supreme Court Employees Welfare Association v. Union of India & Ors.
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. State of Bihar & Ors.
State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Co. Ltd.
Kunhayammed and Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr.
State of U.P. & Anr. v. Synthetics & Chemicals Ltd. & Anr.
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.