A.KULASEKARAN
Mrs. Yashoda Raju – Appellant
Versus
A. Kuselan – Respondent
This revision is posted for admission and I heard the counsel for the petitioner.
2. The tenant is the revision petitioner, who has filed Miscellaneous Petition No. 270 of 2001 in RCOP No. 44 of 2000 seeking permission to file additional counter, which was dismissed by the learned Rent Controller. The appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by the appellate authority, hence this revision petition.
3. On 07-06-2000, the respondent herein has filed RCOP No. 44 of 2000 before the learned Rent Controller, Ootacamund for eviction against the petitioner herein under Section 10 (2) (1) and 14 (1) (b) of the Rent Control Act. The petitioner herein has filed his counter on 28-09-2000 through his then counsel. In Para-2 of the counter, the petitioner has admitted that the respondent herein is the landlord. The petitioner also filed suit O.S. No. 74 of 2000 before the District Munsif, Ootacamund to restrain the respondent herein from dispossessing her without due process of law. In the said suit, she has also filed I.A. No. 163 of 2000. In both the suit and interim application, the petitioner herein has mentioned the respondent as her landlord. Not content with, the petiti
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.