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

1993 Supreme(Mad) 906

THANIKKACHALAM
T. Anandan – Appellant
Versus
Noorjahan – Respondent


Advocates:
K.Sampath, for Petitioner. K.Balasubramaniam, for Ms.C.Rajammal, for Respondent.

Judgment :

The tenant is the petitioner. The petition for eviction was filed under Secs.l0(2)(ii)(b), 10 (2)(iii) and 10(3)(a)(iii) of Act 18 of 1960 as amended by Act 23 of 1973. Ultimately, the only one ground that arises for consideration in this revision is the eviction sought for under Sec.l0(3)(a)(iii) of the Act.

2 The respondent here in is the owner of the entire premises at No.7, Thayar Sahib Road, Mount Road, Madras-2 and the petitioner herein is the tenant under the landlady is respect of the petition premises on a monthly rent of Rs.200. According to the landlady, though the petition premises was let out to the tenant for the purpose of his residence, the tenant is using the same for non-residential purpose. According to the landlady, the tenant installed in the petition premises a commercial banking even deliberately and thereby caused damage to the ceiling of the building. The landlady is residing at premises No.34, Veerasami Pillai Street, Egmore, Madras-8, which is a rented premises. The landlady is also carrying on a business under the name and style of Asian Enterprices in the 2nd Floor of premise old No.200/210, Triplicane High Road and present D.No.75, Quide Mil

























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