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

2000 Supreme(Mad) 693

S.S.SUBRAMANI
R. Sambasivam – Appellant
Versus
Thangavelu Dhanabagyam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S. Nataraj Sankar for Petitioner V.K. Vijayaraghavan for Respondents

Judgment :-

1. Tenant in R.C.O.P. 5 of 1995 on the file of Rent Controller, Mannargudi is the revision petitioner. Landlords filed application for eviction of tenant on the ground of default in payment of rent and also in the ground that they need scheduled building for their own occupation, i.e., for the occupation of their daughter and son-in-law, who are dependants on them.

2. Material averments in the eviction petition are thus. Scheduled building originally belonged to one Abdul Subban and Abdul Samad. Both of them leased out the property to respondent. As per registered sale deed dated 12.10.1992 (Ex.P1) Abdul Subban and Abdul Samed sold the properties to petitioner. Adjoining property also belongs to very same persons which was occupied by one Rasu Chettiar. Sale deed dated 12.10.1992 covers that portion also. After purchase, Rasu Chettiar vacated the premises and landlords obtained possession. According to landlords, they purchased the property only to accommodate their daughter and son in law who are residing in a rented building at Mannargudi and they wanted this building to accommodate them. It is also said that whenever they come to India, they also want to occupy the bu







































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