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

1998 Supreme(Mad) 49

S.JAGADEESAN
B. Anraj Pipada – Appellant
Versus
V. Umayal – Respondent


Advocates:
D.Ashok Kumar, for Petitioner. P.L.Narayanan, for Respondent.

Judgment :

When the stay petition was listed, the main C.R.P., itself had been taken up for final disposal, since the short question involved is whether the petitioner has committed any wilful default in paying the rent. The respondent herein is the landlord of the petition premises. He filed R.C.O.P.No.2418 of 1988 on the file of the Rent Controller. Madras to evict the petitioner herein on the ground of wilful default, since he has failed to pay the rent from December, 1987 to June, 1988. The petitioner filed a counter stating that he had not committed any wilful default and that since the respondent failed to pay the property tax, the Corporation Officials insisted that the petitioner should pay the tax. Without paying the tax, he had deposited the rent in the bank. The Rent Controller by his order dated 26. 1993 allowed the petition for eviction finding that the respondent has not produced any document to establish his defence of depositing the rents in the bank. Further as there is no obligation on the part of the tenant to pay the Corporation Tax, the petitioner ought not to have retained the money to pay the tax and as such the non-payment of the rent by the petitioner is wil














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