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

1992 Supreme(Mad) 454

THANIKKACHALAM
Saraswathi alias Sasikala – Appellant
Versus
Syed Ibrahim – Respondent


Advocates:
P.Peppin Fernando S. William, for Petitioner. M.V.Venkataseshan, for Respondent.

Judgment :

The landlord is the petitioner herein. The landlady filed a petition for eviction against the tenant under Sec.l0(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The case of the landlady is as under: She purchased the petition premises from one Krishnamurthy under a registered sale deed dated 26. 1986. The petition premises is having three Door numbers namely 7, 8 and 9. For Door No.7 the monthly rent isRs.100 and for Door Nos.8 and 9 the monthly rent is Rs.100. The tenant is using the entire premises as a godown. The husband of the landlady is an unemployed person. The landlady is looking after her household work. Both the husband and wife now desire to start a mess in the petition premises. They are having sufficient means to start the mess. The landlady is not having any other premises of her own in the same town. Hence the landlady required the petition premises for conducting a mess under Sec.l0 (3)(a)(iii) of the Act. The landlady sent a notice to the tenant on 11. 1986, calling upon the tenant to quit and deliver vacant possession. The tenant sent a reply dated 111. 1986 refusing to vacate the premises.

2. The case of the tenant is as under:

Th















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