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

1999 Supreme(Mad) 726

V.KANAGARAJ
S. Mohammed Iqubal – Appellant
Versus
M. Padmanabhan – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:C. Chinnasamy, Sr. Counsel For M/s. S. Haja Mohideen, N. Vanchinathan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The Order of the Court was as follows :

The above Civil Revision Petition is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26-3-1994 made in R.C.A. No. 17 of 1992 by the Rent Control Appellate Authority and the Court of Subordinate Judge, Ranipet, thereby reversing the fair and decretal order dated 18-8-1992 made in R.C.O.P. No. 28 of 1986 by the Rent Controller and the District Munsif, Arakkonam.

2. The original petition for eviction of the tenant has been filed by the landlord on four grounds viz. (1) wilful default in payment of rent, under Section 10(2)(i); (2) for committing acts of waste by the tenant thereby impairing materially the value or utility of the building, under Section 10(2)(iii); (3) the tenant being guilty of such acts which are nuisance to the occupiers of the other portions, under Section 10(2)(v) and (4) requiring additional accommodation by the landlord (who is occupying a part of the building) under Section 10(3)(c), all under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960.

3. The Rent Controller, rejecting the claim of the landlord on the first three grounds has allowed the petition on the sole ground of requiring the premises for ad












































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