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

1989 Supreme(Mad) 342

SIVASUBRAMANIAM
Muktha Bai – Appellant
Versus
P. Adinarayana Chetty – Respondent


ORDER

Sivasubramaniam, J.

1. This revision petition is directed against the Judgment in R.C.A. No. 139 of 1982 on the file of the appellate authority (III Judge, Court of Small Causes). Madras. The petitioners are the landlords and the respondent is the tenant.

2. The petitioners/landlords are the owners of the petition mentioned building and they filed a petition for eviction against the respondent/tenant under Section 10(2)(i), 10(2)(ii)(a) and 10(2)(vi) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act) on the ground that the respondent has committed wilful default in the payment of rent 1.6.1978 onwards and that he had subleased the premises and ceased to occupy the same for a continuous period of 18 months without sufficient cause. The respondent resisted the application contending that one Dathuram Devkar, who was the original landlord, was collecting the rent through his agents, that after his death, his agents were collecting the rent upto May, 1978 without revealing the fact that the said Dathuram Devkar was dead and that When he came to know about his death in June, 1978, he was not able to ascertain the legal heirs who are entitled to receive rents and therefore he di










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