REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Satchithanandum Appellant

V/S

KRISHNAMURTHY Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RATHINAM VS. KUPPUSWAMI ODAYAR [REFERRED TO]
V.RAMAR TOWER VS. SRI KANNIKAPARAMESHWARI AMMAN THEVARAM BY TRUSTEE M.NATESAN [REFERRED TO]
N.PERIASAMI VS. PONNUSAMI PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
S N SUDALAIMUTHU CHETTIAR VS. PALANIYANDAVAN [REFERRED TO]
L R GANAPATHI THEVAR VS. NAVANEETHASWARASWAMI DEVASTHANAM [REFERRED TO]
G PONNIAH THEVAR VS. NALLP YAM PERUMAL PTLLAT [REFERRED TO]
CHINNAMARKATHIAN ALIAS MUTHU GOUNDER CHINNA GOUNDER RAJA GOUNDER VS. AYYAVOO ALIAS PERIANA GOUNDER:AYYAVOO ALIAS PERIANA GOUNDER:AYYAVOO ALIAS PERIANA GOUNDER [REFERRED TO]
VENKATASWAMI REDDIAR VS. SUNDARAMOORTHY [REFERRED TO]
KUPPANA CHETTIAR VS. K RAMACHANDRAN [REFERRED TO]
R SESHIER VS. T AYYACHI AMBALAM [REFERRED TO]
BALUCHAMY VS. THAYAMMAL [REFERRED TO]
T SELVARAJAN VS. S MURALIDARAN [REFERRED TO]
R SINGARAVELU PILLAI VS. S B SUBRAMANIA GURUKKAL [REFERRED TO]
RASU VS. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR REVENUE COURT TIRUNELVELI [REFERRED TO]
MARIYAYEE AMMAL VS. JANAB MOHAMMED SHERIFF [REFERRED TO]
ALIMAUMMAL VS. KALIAPERUMAL [REFERRED TO]
HIMALAYAN COOPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY VS. BALWAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAMACHANDIRAN VS. SANJIVI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful cultivating tenant is the revision petitioner, aggrieved by the order passed in PCTPA.No.1 of 2001 by the Revenue Court, Sub-Division (South), Villianur, Puducherry.

(2.) I have heard Ms.Gopika Nambiar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.S.R.Sundar, for Mr.C.Sakthimanikandan, learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) Ms.Gopika Nambiar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners in the revision, Satchithanandum and the 1st respondent, Krishnamurthy died pending PCTPA.No.1 of 2001. Inviting my attention to the application filed by the said Satchithanandum, the cultivating tenant in PCTPA.No.7 of 1990, seeking permission to deposit the rent and the order passed in the said proceedings on 16/7/1990, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the payment of arrears of Rs.8,100.00 was recorded and on 20/8/1999, a memo was filed, not pressing PCTPA.No.7 of 1990, since the object of the said PCTPA had been fulfilled with the payment of Rs.8,100.00.

Click here to view full judgment.

SATCHITHANANDUM Vs. KRISHNAMURTHY

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address