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

1965 Supreme(Mad) 293

K.S.RAMAMURTI, P.RAMAKRISHNAN
Chinnamerkathian alias Muthu Goundar – Appellant
Versus
Ayyavoo alias Perianna Goundar – Respondent


Advocates:
R. Gopalaswami Iyengar, for Petitioners.
V. Vedantackari, for Respondents.

`Ramamurti, J.-

These petitions for grant of leave under Article 133(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the Constitution arise out of proceedings taken by the respondents, the landlords, under the Madras Cultivating Tenants’ Protection Act. The respondents purchased the property from the previous owners, Nachai Ammal and her sons under two sale deeds, Exhibit P-6 dated 22nd January, 1960, and Exhibit P-7 dated 9th March, 1960. On 25th May, 1960, the prior vendors had issued a notice to the tenants, the petitioners herein, claiming the arrears of rent due from them for the years 1958-59 and 1959-60 and also threatening eviction. Under Exhibit P-5 dated 5th December, 1960, the arrears of rent due from the tenants to the vendors were assigned to the respondents, the purchasers, who filed the petition for eviction on 2nd January, 1961, on the grounds that the petitioners herein, the tenants, were guilty of wilful default in the payment of rent.

The tenants resisted the eviction proceedings on the ground that there were no arrears, that they had paid the same to the previous landlords, the vendors, and that even if they were in arrears, the purchaser, who purchased the property subsequently could not















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