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

1996 Supreme(Mad) 439

SRINIVASAN
Santhi & Co – Appellant
Versus
Desigachary – Respondent


Advocates:
A. Ramanathan, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. M.V. Venkataseshan Advocate for Respondent.

Judgment :

1. The respondent is the landlord, who filed a petition under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for fixation of fair rent. The agreed rent was Rs.425 per mensem. The Rent Controller by his order dated 30.9.1994 fixed the fair rent at Rs.2642 per mensem. The aggrieved tenant, who is the petitioner before me, has filed the appeal which is pending as R.C.A.No.136 of 1994 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Madurai, who is the Appellate Authority. During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent filed I.A.No.100 of 1995 under Section 11(4) of the Act for a direction to deposit arrears of rent on the basis of the difference between the agreed rent and the fair rent. According to the petition, a sum of Rs. 1,44,105 was due from the petitioner herein. The petition was contested by the petitioner herein, but the Principal Subordinate Judge has passed on order directing the petitioner to deposit 1/3rd of the difference between the original rent viz., Rs.425 and the enhanced rent of Rs.2,642 into court from the date of R.C.O.P. viz., 24. 1989, on of before 11. 1996. That is with regard to the perio








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