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

1980 Supreme(AP) 340

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : GANGADHARA RAO
Sunkara Venkateswarlu - Appellant
Versus
Kurmala Sri Krishna Murthy lia. Vasudeva Rao - Respondent
C.R.P. 2626/80
Decided On : 12-19-80
Advocates Appeared :
Mr. M. Chandra Sekhara Rao,Mr. C. V. N. Sastri

Headnote:AP Buildings (Lease Rent and eviction) Control Act, 1960 Sec 8 (2) and sub - Sec 4 wilful default of tenant whether procedure under Sec 8 is not mandatory - distinction between default and wilful default

       HELD: The procedure prescribed by or the Consecutive steps mentioned in Sec 8 of the Act are not mandatory and it cannot be stated as a rule of law that whenever the procedure or steps mentioned there in are not followed it must be concluded that the tenant is guilty of wilful default Even thoughts the procedure under See, 8 is not followed there may be other Circumstances which negative the inference of wilful default It is not merely sufficient if there is default It should be wilful default

Sunkara Venkateswarlu vs Kurmala Sri Krishna Murthy lia. Vasudeva Rao - 1980 Supreme(AP) 340
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 Back to top