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

1960 Supreme(Mad) 189

SRINIVASAN
R. Kapanipathi Rao – Appellant
Versus
T. Balakrishna Mehta – Respondent


Advocates:
Messrs. Pais, Lobo and Alvares, for Petitioner.
K. Srinivasan, K. Shanmugham, P. Viraraghavalu and P. Venkataswami, for Respondent.

Judgment.-

This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 30th April, 1959, made by the Court of Small Causes, Madras, which appears to have been passed under section 7-A (4) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. There was a petition filed before the Rent Controller for the eviction of the petitioner-tenant on the ground of default in the payment of rent and also on the ground of material alteration of premises. The petititon seems to have been allowed and the matter was taken up in appeal to the Court of Small Causes at Madras. In the meantime, the petitioner appears to have filed an application for the fixation of fair rent. The Controller fixed this fair rent at Rs. 225 per month as against the previous rent of Rs. 300 and this order was passed on 15th April, 1959. It is said that a revision is pending before this Court against that order. I am not at present concerned with it.

During the pendency of the appeal before the lower appellate Court, it seems to have been brought to the notice of the Court that the tenant who is under an obligation under section 7-A (1) of the Act to continue to make payments of the rent as they fell due had not so made any







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