SUBRAMANIAM SHANMUGHAM versus M.L. RAJENDRAN & ORS.

SUBRAMANIAM SHANMUGHAM versus M.L. RAJENDRAN & ORS.

The portion let out to the tenant was not, in context or user, a separate and distinct unit, but only a small part of the residential building; thus, the landlord was entitled to seek eviction under s.10(3)(c). The expression 'as the case may be' does not alter this where there are not separable units. The respondents' hardship outweighed that of the appellant, justifying eviction.

Parties
Appellant: SUBRAMANIAM SHANMUGHAM; Respondents: M.L. RAJENDRAN & ORS.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 August 1987
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Order Granting Eviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Eviction, Interpretation of Statutes, Residential and Non Residential Premises, Comparative Hardship
Land Law Landlord and Tenant Rent Control Eviction Interpretation of Statutes Residential and Non Residential Premises Comparative Hardship

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SUBRAMANIAM SHANMUGHAM

Appellant

M.L. RAJENDRAN & ORS.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Order Granting Eviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a portion of a residential building leased for non-residential purposes can be treated as a separate and distinct unit under s.10(3)(c) of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960
  2. 2 Meaning of the expression 'as the case may be' in s.10(3)(c)
  3. 3 Whether comparative hardship was properly assessed

Ratio Decidendi

The portion let out to the tenant was not, in context or user, a separate and distinct unit, but only a small part of the residential building; thus, the landlord was entitled to seek eviction under s.10(3)(c). The expression 'as the case may be' does not alter this where there are not separable units. The respondents' hardship outweighed that of the appellant, justifying eviction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • No order as to costs.