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

1977 Supreme(Mad) 369

N.S.RAMASWAMI
P. Ethirajammal – Appellant
Versus
N. Hassan Kanoo – Respondent


Advocates:
O. Radhakrishnan and M. Devandran, for Appellant; A. Subramania Iyer, for Respondent.

Judgement

JUDGMENT:- This second appeal arises out of a suit in ejectment. The legal representative of the plaintiff-landlord landlord is the appellant before me. The premises is door No. 36 Muthumari Chetti St., Mannady, Madras, which the respondent in this appeal (hereinafter referred to as the tenant) had taken on lease on a monthly rent of Rs. 700. According to the landlord (plaintiff) the building had been put up in the year 1965 and therefore the same was exempt under S. 30 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, Act 18 of 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as it then stood. It may be noted that under the above provision, any building constructed after the commencement of the Act was exempt from the provisions of the Act. Therefore in respect of such buildings, the landlord need not make out a case under S. 10 of the Act to evict the tenant. When the suit was filed in the present case, admittedly the building was exempt from the provisions of the Act and therefore the landlord had no necessity to make out any of the grounds under S. 10 of the Act and go before the Rent Controller. Hence the suit was filed in the City Civil Court for possession afte















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