SRINIVASAN
Masilamani – Appellant
Versus
V. Baliah – Respondent
Srinivasan, J.
1. This revision is by the tenant, who has suffered an order of eviction before the authorities below.
2. The respondent sought eviction on the grounds of wilful default and requirement for own occupation for residential purpose. The Rent Controller negatived the ground of wilful default and ordered eviction on the ground of requirement for own occupation. The Appellate Authority confirmed the said order. The tenant filed C. R. P. No. 1849 of 1984 in this Court. By that time, another tenant against whom a similar eviction petition was filed at the same time by the respondent had vacated and that portion was occupied by the respondent herein. It was argued in that Revision Petition that the portion occupied by the respondent was sufficient for his purposes and the bona fide of the requirement ceased to exist. Sathar Sayeed, J., accepted that contention and by his order on 3-1-1986 remanded the matter to the Appellate Authority with the following observation:
I am of the view, considering the contention of the learned Counsel of the petitioner that the said tenant Selvaraj has vacated a portion of the premises, it is just and reasonable that a finding has to be given
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.