Skip to content


Markapuli Reddiar Vs. Thandava Kone and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1915Mad356(1); 25Ind.Cas.916
AppellantMarkapuli Reddiar
RespondentThandava Kone and anr.
Excerpt:
madras estates land act (i of 1908), sections 6 and 8 - occupancy right--eyoti land--purchase by landlord--merger--tenant in possession, whether entitled to claim occupancy rights. - 1. we must take it that in 1878 when the landlord brought the tenant's interest in the land to sale for arrears of rent and purchased if himself it was ryoti land. section 8 of the madras estates land act enacts that the occupancy and land lord's rights did not merge by the purchase and that the landlord did not acquire occupancy right. the land remained ryoti, and 2nd defendant being in possession as a ryot when the act came into operation, must be taken to have acquired occupancy right by virtue of section 6, if he did not possess it before.2. the suit must, therefore, fail, and is dismissed. first defendant will bear 2nd defendant's costs throughout, and 1st defendant and plaintiff will bear their own.
Judgment:

1. We must take it that in 1878 when the landlord brought the tenant's interest in the land to sale for arrears of rent and purchased if himself it was ryoti land. Section 8 of the Madras Estates Land Act enacts that the occupancy and land lord's rights did not merge by the purchase and that the landlord did not acquire occupancy right. The land remained ryoti, and 2nd defendant being in possession as a ryot when the Act came into operation, must be taken to have acquired occupancy right by virtue of Section 6, if he did not possess it before.

2. The suit must, therefore, fail, and is dismissed. First defendant will bear 2nd defendant's costs throughout, and 1st defendant and plaintiff will bear their own.


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