R.Radhakrishnan v. K.Anusuya
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court held that a Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 is not maintainable against an order passed by the Rent Controller when Section 23 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act provides a specific remedy for appeal to the Appellate Authority. The petition was rejected as not maintainable.
What did the court decide?
The Civil Revision Petition was rejected as not maintainable.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.12.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
C.R.P.(NPD) No.3806 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.19449 of 2016
R.Radhakrishnan
... Petitioner
Vs.
K.Anusuya
rep by her Power Agent A.K.Ramesh
... Respondent
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order and decreetal order dated 21.09.2016 made in M.P.No.12 of 2016 in R.C.O.P.No.15 of 1999 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ambattur.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution is maintainable when the order under challenge was passed by the Rent Controller under Section 23 of the Tamil Nadu Buildi
Whether the tenant can prefer an appeal under Section 23 to the Appellate Authority when an impugned order has been passed by the Rent Controller.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
R.Radhakrishnan
- respondent
K.Anusuya
Coram
M.Duraismwamy
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court