ARUNA JAGADEESAN
Central Hameedia Stores & two others – Appellant
Versus
Valliammmal @ Rajammal – Respondent
1. The tenants are the petitioners. The respondent/landlady filed R.C.O.P. 11/87 on the file of the Rent Controller (District Munsif), Sankarankoil to evict the petitioners herein on the ground of wilful default and for demolition and reconstruction.
2. The respondent’s case is that the monthly rent for the premises is Rs.500/- of which Rs.350/- is to be paid every month on or before 5th of succeeding month and Rs.150/-has to be paid in the consolidated basis, once in six months. The petitioners failed to pay the rent from 30th March to 30th September, accruing to Rs.900/- at the rate of Rs.150/- p.m and failed to pay the entire rent from 9. 86 to 30.87. The building is 60 years old and the respondent wants to demolish the existing superstructure a nd put up the new building in order to augment the income.
3. The petitioners opposed the application by filing counter stating that there is no arrears at all and the agreed rent is only Rs.350/- p.m. and since the respondent’s grandson was collecting the rent, had refused to receive the rent, the rents were not paid.
4. However, during the evidence the petitioners represented that the rent had been deposited in the rent
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.