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

2010 Supreme(Mad) 3647

R.S.RAMANATHAN
K. Shanmugavel – Appellant
Versus
V. S. Thirumalaisamy Nadar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Appearing Advocates:For the Petitioner:F.X. Eugene, Advocate.

Judgment :-

The revision petitioner, in all the four civil revision petitions, is the landlord and the respondents in the above civil revision petitions are the tenants.

2. The revision petitioner is the owner of two shops and the respondent in CRP(NPD)Nos.451 and 453 of 2005 is the tenant in respect of one shop and the respondent in CRP(NPD)No.452 and 454 of 2005 is the tenant of the other shop. Both the shops are adjacent to each other and both of them are paying the monthly rent of Rs.300/-to the landlord/revision petitioner.

3. The tenants/respondents filed RCOP petitions under section 8(5) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act to deposit the rent as the landlord refused to receive the rent and thereafter, the landlord filed application for eviction against the tenants on the ground of wilful default in the payment of rent and requirement of the building for his own occupation.

4. The learned Rent Controller dismissed the application filed under section 8(5) of the Act filed by the tenants and allowed the application filed by the landlord for eviction on the ground of wilful default and denied the eviction on the ground of owners occupation and aggrieved by the
























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