M.V.MURALIDARAN
E. Valliammal – Appellant
Versus
R. Ravichandran – Respondent
All these Civil Revision Petitions are arising out of Common Judgment made in R.C.O.Ps and R.C.As. Therefore Common Order is delivered in these Civil Revision Petitions. Out of three Civil Revision Petitions, two revision petitions are filed by the respective tenants and the respondents 2 to 4 in the R.C.O.P.Nos.1695 and 1697 of 2003. The C.R.P.No.833 of 2012 is filed by the respondents 2 to 4 in R.C.O.P.No.1696 of 2003 and the 1st respondent/tenant has not preferred any revision as against the order of eviction and he was arrayed as 2nd respondent in C.R.P.No.833 of 2012. In fact, the tenant Gopi who is 2nd respondent in C.R.P.No.833 of 2003 has vacated and handed over possession of the petition mentioned premises to the respondent herein/landlord even prior to the filing of this Civil Revision and to that effect he has executed Full and Final Settlement agreement to the landlord/respondent herein on 10.11.2011.
2. It is the case of the Revision petitioners/tenants and other petitioners 2 to 4 that one R. Ravichandran claims to be landlord of the petition premises on the ground that he has purchased the property under Ex-P-1 sale deed dated 07.12.2000. On the basis of the sa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.