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

2001 Supreme(Ker) 524

R.P.SETHI, M.B.SHAH
Ouseph Mathai – Appellant
Versus
Abdul Khader – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. Leave granted.

2. Assuming jurisdiction and exercising powers under Art.227 of the Constitution of India, the High Court of Kerala, vide the order impugned in these appeals set aside the judgment of the appellate authority by which the order passed by the rent control court dismissing the respondents-tenants application under S.11(2)(c) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") had been confirmed. After holding that the deposit of the arrears of rent was in terms of S.11(2)(c) of the Act, the High Court gave the respondents-tenants a right to exercise option under the proviso to S.11(4) of the Act. The court held that the power of superintendence conferred upon the High Court under Art.227 of the Constitution of India was not an original proceeding but revisional jurisdiction akin to S.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The High Court, therefore, impliedly held that exercise of powers under Art.227 was the extension of the statutory powers conferred upon the appellate or revisional authority under a particular statute.

3. Assailing the impugned judgment it has been argued on behalf of the appellants-landlords tha































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