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

1984 Supreme(AP) 325

P.RAMACHANDRA RAJU, PUNNAIAH
B. VINOD KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
D. RAVINDERNATH – Respondent


( 1 ) THE question for consideration involved in these revisions is in respect of G. O. Ms. No. 4, dated 3-1-1966, published in A. P. Gazette extraordinary dated 5-1-1966. The question is, as to whether this G. O. is applicable to the Courts that were in existence on the date when the G. O. came into force, or whether it would apply to the courts which came into existence or established after the G. O. was notified. In view of the importance of the question, the revisions are referred to a Bench, for consideration. These cases coming on for further hearing before the Bench the court deliverd the following judgment: judgment (Judgment of the Bench delivered by Ramachandra Raju, J.)

( 2 ) THESE eight revisions filed under Sec. 22 of the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction ) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter called the Act ) involve common questions and arise out of the individual judgments dated 29-10-1983 of the Pri. Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada, the Appellate authority under the Act, in R C. A. Nos. 117, 118, 119 and 120 of 1982 and cross Objections filed in each of those appeals. The Land Lord is common but the four tenants are different. For purpose of convenience, the partie










































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