THANIKKACHALAM
Rajarani Silk Palace and others – Appellant
Versus
C. K. B. Murugan – Respondent
The tenants are the petitioners herein.
.2. The petition for eviction was filed under Secs.l0 (2)(ii)(a) and l0(2)(iii)of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18 of 1960 as amended by Act 23 of 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
3. The petition premises is situated at No.31, Nainappan Street, Mannadi, Madras-1. The petitioners herein are the tenants in respect of the petition premises on the monthly rent of Rs.1,000 payable according to English calendar month. According to the landlord, the tenants sublet the petition premises to the respondents 6 to 8 without the written consent of the landlord. Further, according to the landlord, the tenants without the permission of the landlord put up a construction in the open space on the first floor. Therefore, according to the landlord, the value and utility of the building are materially impaired. Hence, the petition was filed under Secs.l0(2)(a)(ii) and 10(2)(iii)of the Act.
4. The tenants filed the counter stating that there is no subletting to the respondents 6 to 8 as alleged by the landlord. According to the tenants, the rent is Rs.500 per mensem for both residential and non-residential portions
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.