Skip to content


Gopal Naicken Vs. Sappa Pillai and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectTenancy
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in2Ind.Cas.484
AppellantGopal Naicken
RespondentSappa Pillai and ors.
Excerpt:
landlord and tenant - suit for rent accrued duo--eviction of tenant before period of lease--whether disentitles landlord from claiming rent. - - 1. the district munsif has, as i understand him, found (and the promissory notes are good evidence in support of his finding) that the rent accrued due at or before the time at which the promissory notes were executed. 2. the subsequent eviction by the landlord is not a good defence to his suit for this rent.miller, j.1. the district munsif has, as i understand him, found (and the promissory notes are good evidence in support of his finding) that the rent accrued due at or before the time at which the promissory notes were executed.2. the subsequent eviction by the landlord is not a good defence to his suit for this rent.3. the decree must be reversed and the claims of plaintiff decreed in each case with costs throughout.4. if the defendants were evicted before the end of their terra they may have a claim for damages.
Judgment:

Miller, J.

1. The District Munsif has, as I understand him, found (and the promissory notes are good evidence in support of his finding) that the rent accrued due at or before the time at which the promissory notes were executed.

2. The subsequent eviction by the landlord is not a good defence to his suit for this rent.

3. The decree must be reversed and the claims of plaintiff decreed in each case with costs throughout.

4. If the defendants were evicted before the end of their terra they may have a claim for damages.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //