Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.Balaji, J
M.Srinivasan – Appellant
Versus
The Estate Officer, Chennai District – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to eviction from 1888 government land grant. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. pp act inapplicable to pre-act land grants. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. pp act applies; estoppel bars ownership claims. (Para 7) |
| 4. public premises includes government-leased lands. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. lessee estopped from denying government title. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 6. prior proceedings affirm lessee status; lease terminated. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 7. acquiescence estops pp act jurisdiction challenge. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 8. lease abolition act inapplicable to site. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 9. article 227 not for re-agitation. (Para 26 , 27) |
| 10. pp act covers terminated pre-act tenancies. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 11. revisions dismissed; no costs. (Para 33) |
COMMON ORDER
The revision petitioners, aggrieved by the judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in the respective C.M.A.Nos.9 of 2025 and 10 of 2025, have come up by way of these revision petitions.
2.I have heard Mr.B.Kumar, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.A.K.Raghavulu, learned Counsel for the revision petitioners in C.R.P.No.5506 of 2025, Mr.R.Parthasarathy, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.A.R.Pradeep, learned Counse
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
