S.S.SUBRAMANI
Renganathan – Appellant
Versus
Pandurangan and Another – Respondent
This revision under Art.227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the tenant in H.R.C.O.P. No.4 of 1990, on the file of the Principal District Munsif (Rent Controller), Tindivanam.
2. By virtue of the impugned order, the Rent Controller allowed the application of the first respondent herein, to get himself impleaded in the proceeding and allowed him to continue the proceeding already initiated by the previous landlord.
3. The original petition was filed by the previous owner as H.R.C.O.P. No.4 of 1990. Pending proceeding, the respondent No.1 purchased the property as per sale deeds dated 212. 1991 and 212. 1991. Thereafter, an application was filed by the very same respondent to get himself impleaded as a respondent in the proceeding, which he subsequently withdraw. Later he filed the present application, namely, LA. No.5 of 1994, for getting himself impleaded as additional petitioner in the R.C.O.P. In the meanwhile, the original petition itself was dismissed for default, and hence, the first respondent wanted himself to be permitted to continue the original petition, or to initiate proceedings for restoration of the original petition.
4. By virtue of the impugned
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.