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

1982 Supreme(Mad) 217

NAINAR SUNDARAM
T. K. Sundaram – Appellant
Versus
V. Balraj – Respondent


Advocates:
Inamdar Abdus Salam, for Petitioner A.C. Munusamy Reddi, for Respondent

Judgement

ORDER :- The 'landlord' within the meaning of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18 of 1960, hereinafter referred to as the Act, is the petitioner in this revision filed under Art.227 of the Constitution of India. The respondent herein is the 'tenant' within the meaning of the Act. The petitioner sought eviction of the respondent under the provisions of the Act in HRC No. 1909 of 1980 on the file of the Eleventh Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, hereinafter referred to as the Controller. Eviction was ordered on 10-11-1980. The respondent preferred HRA No. 222 of 1981, to the concerned appellate authority and the said appeal was dismissed for default on 28-9-1981. While the appeal was pending, there was an order of stay in M.P. No. 107 of 1981. The respondent preferred M. P. No. 631 of 1981 to set aside the order of dismissal for default on 16-10-1981. The provision quoted in the application was Rule 23 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Rules. Obviously, this is a mistake for Rule 16 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Rules 1974, hereinafter referred to as the rules. The appellate authority ordered notice to the petiti













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