CHANDRASHEKHAR
MALAI KOLANDAI MUDALIAR – Appellant
Versus
M. R. SWAMINATHAN – Respondent
( 2 ) THE landlord presented an application for eviction of the tenant on the grounds specified in clauses (a), (h) and (p) of the proviso to S. 21 (1) of the Act. Though the learned Munsiff found that the landlord bona fide requires the premises for his own use and occupation, the learned Munsiff herd that eviction could not be ordered under clause (h) of the said proviso, as the tenancy commenced prior to the coming into force of the Act and as the landlord wants the premises to start a business. However, the learned Munsiff decreed eviction under clause (p ). In appeal, the learned district Judge held that the ground specified in clause (p) was not established, but sustained the decree for eviction on a different ground, namely, that specified in clause (h ). In this petition, the learned Counsel for the landlord did not
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.