MOHIDEEN ABDUL KHADAR (DEAD)THROUGH LRS. versus RAHMATH BEEVI (D) THR. HER LRS. AND ORS.

MOHIDEEN ABDUL KHADAR (DEAD)THROUGH LRS. versus RAHMATH BEEVI (D) THR. HER LRS. AND ORS.

The High Court correctly accepted the measurement of the second scheduled property as 15 feet (east-west) by 18 feet (north-south) as described in the sale deed in favour of Rahmath Beevi, held that after purchase the plaintiff stepped into the shoes of the original owner and validly issued notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 terminating any tenancy, and therefore the defendants (predecessor of petitioners) were not entitled to protection under the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1921; on that basis the Supreme Court found no reason to interfere and dismissed the petitions.

Parties
Petitioner: Mohideen Abdul Khadar (dead) through LRs.; Respondent: Rahmath Beevi (D) thr. her LRs. and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) / Final Judgment on Special Leave Petition
Outcome
Petitions dismissed.
Legal Topics
Section 106, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1921, Possession, Title, Measurement of Property
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Civil Procedure Section 106, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 Possession Title Measurement of Property

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohideen Abdul Khadar (dead) through LRs.

Petitioner

Rahmath Beevi (D) thr. her LRs. and Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) / Final Judgment on Special Leave Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Correct measurement of the second scheduled property
  2. 2 Validity of notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882
  3. 3 Applicability of the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 to the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court correctly accepted the measurement of the second scheduled property as 15 feet (east-west) by 18 feet (north-south) as described in the sale deed in favour of Rahmath Beevi, held that after purchase the plaintiff stepped into the shoes of the original owner and validly issued notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 terminating any tenancy, and therefore the defendants (predecessor of petitioners) were not entitled to protection under the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1921; on that basis the Supreme Court found no reason to interfere and dismissed the petitions.

Court Disposition

Petitions dismissed.

Orders

  • Petitions dismissed.
  • Interim order, if any, vacated.