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

1988 Supreme(Mad) 74

SRINIVASAN
Thayammal – Appellant
Versus
K. Subramaniam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:K.M. Santhanagopalan, R. Srinivasan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

This civil revision petition arises out of an eviction petition filed on two grounds, viz., wilful default in payment of rent and bona fide requirement for demolition and reconstruction. Both the authorities below have accepted the evidence let in by the landlord and held that he has made out both the grounds of eviction with the result an order of eviction has been passed.

2. Learned counsel for the tenant-revision petitioner contends that there is no question of default being wilful as the tenant had been paying her previous landlord from whom the present landlord had purchased the property in 1978 the rent in instalments once in three or six months. The tenant has produced Exs.B. 1 to B.4, which are receipts issued by the prior landlord on 15-9-1976, 21-11-1976, 20-1-1977 and 15-4-1978. On those occasions, rents were paid for several months together. It is also seen from Ex.B.7 that the rent was sent to the present landlord for ten months together by one money order. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the documentary evidence produced by the tenant proves that she was in the habit of paying the rents once in two months and that it was an i









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