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

1994 Supreme(Mad) 701

ABDUL HADI
Ganapathy Ammal – Appellant
Versus
Chandaresan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:A. Sankarasubramaniam, Advocate.
For the Respondent:P. Peppin Fernando, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. This review application is filed by the respondent in C.R.P. No. 2740 of 1993 and is against my order dated 25.11.1993 in the said civil revision petition.

2. The petitioner is the landlady under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and she filed R.C.O.P. No. 9 of 1990 on the file of the Rent Controller, Valliyur for eviction of the respondent tenant herein from the petition building, inter alia on the ground of demolition and reconstruction. In 1993 she filed I.A. No. 8 of 1993, where she sought for cancellation of the earlier report of the Advocate-Commissioner, regarding the condition of the building in question and sought for appointment of an engineer as Commissioner to report regarding the condition of the building. The said application was allowed. Aggrieved, the respondent herein filed the abovesaid civil revision petition, and by the above referred to order dated 25.11.19931 set aside the order in I.A. No. 8 of 1993 and allowed the civil revision petition. Aggrieved by the said order dated 25.11.1993 this review petition has been filed by the landlady.

3. The only contention of learned counsel for t




















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