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

1979 Supreme(AP) 53

SEETHARAM REDDY
Kadimcherla Sobhanadri – Appellant
Versus
Manga Ramadas – Respondent


( 1 ) THE question that arises in this revision is, whether the purchaser of the tenant-occupied premises can file an application under Order 1, rule 10, Civil Procedure code, so as to be brought on record as one of the petitioners to the main petitioners to the main petition filed by his vendor for eviction of vendor s tenant from the said premises.

( 2 ) THE petitioners herein are the tenants. The 2nd respondent herein filed I. A. No. 435 of 1978 in R. C. C. No. 87 of 1974 to add her as the 2nd petitioner in the main R. C. C. under Order 1, rule 1c and section 131, Civil Procedure code. That petition was filed on the basis that pending the main R. C. C. she purchased the premises in question and, therefore, she would like to be added as the 2nd petitioner for the purpose of evicting the respondents-tenants from the said premises. An objection was raised by the petitioners herein stating that Order 1, rule 10 has no application and the Rent Control Court has no jurisdiction to allow the said I. A. The Rent Controller allowed the application holding that Order J, rule 10 and section 151, civil Procedure Code, are applicable to the case on hand. Aggrieved by the said order, the peti










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