S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
N. M. Narayanan – Appellant
Versus
Naduvil Madom – Respondent
1. Some of the defendants in a suit for eviction are the appellants. Concurrent decision rendered by the courts below holding that the first respondent/plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit property, a building with arrears of rent and also the sum fixed due, towards use and occupation of the building after termination of the tenancy, is challenged in the appeal.
2. Admittedly, the building is owned by the plaintiff and it was let out under a tenancy arrangement, fixing a monthly rent of Rs.15/- per month by a registered deed in 1951, in favour of the predecessor of the defendants. Subsequently the rent was enhanced to Rs.40/- per month. Plaintiff is a Hindu religious institution, governed by the provisions covered by Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act 15 of 1950, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. The Cochin Devaswom Board constituted under the above Act, admittedly, has a supervisory regulatory control over the affairs of the institution in the creation of mortgages, charges, alienation etc. over its properties, as under Section 86 of the Act. The defendant in the suit had resisted the eviction admitting the tenancy arrangement over the building
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.