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

1981 Supreme(Ker) 40

T.CHANDRASEKHARA MENON
ABDUREHIM SAIT – Appellant
Versus
SAHUL HAMEED – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. This Civil Revision Petition arises out of a proceeding for eviction under S.11 (4) (i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, the Act for short. The landlord the applicant for eviction is the revision petitioner. Two grounds were taken for eviction, one the tenant had kept the rent in arrears and two, he had sub-let the premises to another who was carrying on tobacco business in the premises for which he had obtained a licence from the Central Excise Authority, marked as Ext. A2 in the case I might first note that the question of arrears of rent does not now arise. The Rent Controller had come to the conclusion that there was no arrears of rent and the tenant subsequently also was paying the rent so that neither before the Appellate Authority nor before the Revisional Authority under the Act, that question did not come into the tore.

2. In the objection the tenant had filed (he had filed the same along with the sub-lessee whip was the second counter petitioner before the Rent Controller's Court) it had been stated that he was conducting the business in the : remises from 1-3-1963 in the name of Hameed and Company, on the request of the petitioner





































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