HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr Justice SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
S KARUNANIDHI – Appellant
Versus
V. NATARAJAN – Respondent
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition had been filed seeking to set aside the fair and final order of the learned Sub Judge (Rent Control Appellate Authority), Tiruvarur, dated 10.03.2020 made in R.C.A.No.1 of 2018 confirming the fair and final order of the learned District Munsif (Rent Controller), Tiruvarur dated 20.11.2017 made in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2014 and allow the above revision.
2.The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner was not a tenant in the premises for which R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2014 was filed by the Respondent claiming the property through the Will executed by land lady, as he was a permissive occupier. The Respondent had instituted the Petition for eviction on the ground of demolition and construction. He claimed that he had put on notice to the Petitioner herein, who is Respondent in R.C.O.P. as tenant, objected his tenancy. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that in the R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2014, the Petitioner filed a counter denying the status that he was not a tenant and he was permissive occupier. Therefore, the Rent Control Original Petition is not at all maintainable. In spite of the same, learned District Munsif (Rent Controller) Tir
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.