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

2024 Supreme(Mad) 2358

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR
S. Mohanraj – Appellant
Versus
R. Renuka Dev – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S. Senthilnathan.

Table of Content
1. eviction proceedings based on tenancy registration failures. (Para 2)
2. legal clarifications concerning applicability of tenancy laws. (Para 3)
3. judicial interpretations involving land ownership and rental agreements. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. concluding the dismissal of eviction petition with a timeline for vacating. (Para 17 , 18)

ORDER :

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

Challenge has been made to the concurrent findings of the rent appellate authority and rent controller ordering eviction.

2. The brief facts leading to filing of the revision is as follows:

2.a. Application has been filed by the respondents/landlord for eviction of the tenant/revision petitioner on the ground that agreement of tenancy has not been registered after the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlord and Tenants Act, 2017 ("TNRRRLT Act" hereinafter) came into force. Therefore, invoking Section 21(2)(a), the application was filed before the Rent Controller.

2.b. It was the case of the respondents/landlord that the revision petitioner was inducted as the tenant during the year 2000 for a monthly rent of Rs.1,100/- and and had paid a sum of Rs.2,500/-

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