TMT. KASTHURI RADHAKRISHNAN & ORS. versus M. CHINNIYAN & ANR.

TMT. KASTHURI RADHAKRISHNAN & ORS. versus M. CHINNIYAN & ANR.

The eviction petition filed by the appellant-wife and sons (Class-I heirs) of the deceased landlord is maintainable even without impleading all co-owners; the relationship of landlord and tenant between respondents and the original owner as well as his heirs is established; power of attorney holder's actions do not create personal rights; the High Court had no jurisdiction to overturn concurrent factual findings without apparent perversity; the eviction order must be restored.

Parties
Appellants/plaintiffs/landlords: Tmt. Kasthuri Radhakrishnan & Ors.; Respondent No.1/tenant: M. Chinniyan; Respondents: M. Chinniyan & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appeal From High Court Judgment; Eviction Order Challenged
Outcome
Appeal allowed; eviction order restored; High Court's judgment set aside.
Legal Topics
Revisional Jurisdiction of High Court, Non Joinder of Necessary Parties, Power of Attorney in Tenancy Agreements, Relationship of Landlord and Tenant
Rent Control and Eviction Property Law Revisional Jurisdiction of High Court Non Joinder of Necessary Parties Power of Attorney in Tenancy Agreements Relationship of Landlord and Tenant

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tmt. Kasthuri Radhakrishnan & Ors.

Appellants/plaintiffs/landlords

M. Chinniyan

Respondent No.1/tenant

M. Chinniyan & Anr.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appeal From High Court Judgment; Eviction Order Challenged

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether eviction petition is maintainable for non-joinder of co-owner/daughter
  2. 2 Whether appellants established landlord-tenant relationship with respondent No. 1
  3. 3 Whether High Court could interfere with concurrent findings of facts

Ratio Decidendi

The eviction petition filed by the appellant-wife and sons (Class-I heirs) of the deceased landlord is maintainable even without impleading all co-owners; the relationship of landlord and tenant between respondents and the original owner as well as his heirs is established; power of attorney holder's actions do not create personal rights; the High Court had no jurisdiction to overturn concurrent factual findings without apparent perversity; the eviction order must be restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; eviction order restored; High Court's judgment set aside.

Orders

  • Respondent No.1 granted three months to vacate the premises from date of judgment upon furnishing undertaking and depositing all arrears of rent (if any) and three months’ advance rent as damages; Rs.5000/- costs to be paid by respondent to appellants; Appellants entitled to withdraw deposits after verification.