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

1991 Supreme(Mad) 109

SOMASUNDARAM
A. M. Dhanapal Chcttiar – Appellant
Versus
T. D. Sundaram and others – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:R.Sundararajan, for Petitioner. R.S.Ramanathan for M.V.Venkataseshan, for Respondents.

Judgment :-

The petitioner in R.C.O.P.No.27 of 1981 on the file of the Rent Controller Mun-sif), Krishnagiri, is the petitioner in this civil revision petition. The respondents said R.C.O.P. are the respondents in this civil revision petition. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in this order by the nomenclature given to them in the R.C.O.P.

2. The petitioner filed an application R.CO.P.No27 of 1981 for eviction against respondents under Secl0(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) XVIII of 1960, hereinafter called the Act. The case of the petitioner is as follows:

“The two shops bearing door Nos.79 and 80 which are described in the schedule appended the petition belonged to the petitioner. The first respondent took door No.80 for rent about 1968 and door No.79 in 1969 on a monthly rent of Rs.80 and Rs.100 respectively occupied them. At present the rent for both the shops is Rs.500 per month. The petitioner has got three major sons of whom the youngest is studying in the Engineering College he would be completing his course soon. The other two sons are graduates. One of them engaged in the motor transport business and the other is witho




















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