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

1994 Supreme(Mad) 529

PRATAP SINGH
Alagumani – Appellant
Versus
K. Shanmugham and Others – Respondent


Advocates:
V. Narayanasamy, for Petitioner. M. Sundar for M/s.Abdul Razak and K.Sikkandar, for Respondents.

Judgment :

This civil revision petition is directed against the judgment in R.C.A.No.1032 of 1986 on the file of Appellate Authority (VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras), in which the learned Appellate Authority has confirmed the order of the Rent Controller in R.C.O.P.No.2710 of 1984 on the file of Rent Controller (IX Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras).

2. Short facts are: The respondents had filed petition for eviction on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent for the period from 10. 1983 to 30.6.1984. That was resisted by the revision petitioner. After enquiry,. the learned Rent Controller found that there was wilful default in payment of rent and had ordered eviction. Aggrieved by the same, the tenant had filed R.C.A.No.1032 of 1986 and having failed there also, has come forward with this revision.

3. Mr.Narayanaswamy, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, would submit that at the time of the earlier R.C.O.P. against the very same tenant for eviction on the ground of requirement for demolition and reconstruction, there was arrears of rent for the period of two months and subsequently on 12. 1984, the tenant, sent the rent-by money order



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