VENKATASWAMI
Hidayathullah – Appellant
Versus
Appellate Authority (Rent Controller) III Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras – Respondent
ORDER :- When the W.M. Ps. came up for final order, the counsel on both sides agreed for the disposal of the writ petition itself. Hence the writ petition was taken up for disposal.
2. This petition is for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent (Appellate Authority, Rent Control), III Judge, Court of Small Causes, to entertain the appeal RCA No...... of 1984 S. R. No. 23032 against the order in M. P. 863 of 1984 in E. P. 948 of 1984 in HRC 812 of 1981, on the file of the IX Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras and dispose of the same on merits.
2A. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition briefly may be stated. The petitioner is a co-owner of the premises bearing Nos. 180 Anna Pillai St. Madras 1, hereinafter called the suit premises. The 3rd respondent hereinafter called the tenant was a tenant in a portion of the premises on a monthly rent of Rs. 40. The petitioner filed HRC 812 of 1981 for eviction of the tenant on the ground of wilful default. The petitioner was successful before the Rent Controller as well as before the Appellate Authority and ultimately in this court. Even though the tenant filed an undertaking affidavit in this Cou
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.