IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Kantilal Lasaji – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the tenancy and eviction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. tenant's attempts to resolve payment dispute. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. decisions of the rent controller; appeals filed. (Para 8 , 9 , 12) |
| 4. arguments about sub-letting and rent payment. (Para 10 , 11 , 21) |
| 5. legal standards for proving sub-letting. (Para 15 , 16 , 20) |
| 6. court's observation on tenant's payment practices. (Para 22 , 23 , 27) |
| 7. court's reasoning against finding of wilful default. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 28 , 29) |
| 8. legal thresholds for proving sub-letting and exclusive control over premises. (Para 32) |
| 9. final ruling in favor of tenant/revision petitioner. (Para 34) |
ORDER :
1. Both the Civil Revision Petitions are filed against the common Judgment dated 24.09.2021 passed in R.C.A. Nos. 765 and 790 of 2018 on the file of the learned VII Judge, Small Causes Court (Appellate Authority) at Chennai.
2. The RCOP No. 1431 of 2015 was filed by Dinesh Kumar (hereinafter referred to as Landlord) under Section 10 (2) (i) and 10 (2) (ii) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 praying to pass an order of eviction against the Respondents namely (i) Kantilal Lasaji and (ii) Beru Singh (he
Jagdish Prasad vs. Angoori Devi
S.K. Raffudin and others vs. N. Yeswantha Rao and others
Gundalapalli Rangamannar Chetty vs. Desu Rangiah and others
M. Bhaskar vs. J. Venkatarama Naidu Rep. by his Power of Attorney Holder A. Narayanaswamy Naidu
The court ruled that to establish sub-letting under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, the landlord must prove the tenant has transferred exclusive possession, which was not done ....
The Supreme Court reaffirmed that the burden of proving unlawful sub-letting rests with the landlord and clarified the distinction between revisional and appellate jurisdiction, emphasizing that High....
Revisional jurisdiction under rent act limits interference to perversity or illegality, not reappreciation; impleaded subtenant has locus to challenge; pleading deficiencies non-fatal absent prejudic....
The burden of proof in establishing illegal subletting and the interpretation of legal provisions related to withdrawal of earlier proceedings were central to the judgment.
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.