T K SUBRAMANIA PILLAI Vs. PENNINGTON COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question that arises in the second appeal and the civil revision petition is whether the appellant, who was the defendant in the suit is entitled to the benefits of the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, hereinafter Referred to as the Act . That in turn depends upon the question whether the subject-matter of the lease in his favour by the respondent-plaintiff was a land or a building"

(2.) THE trial Court held that the subject-matter of the lease was a land and that the defendant was entitled to purchase the land under Sec.9 of the Act. Consequently, the trial Court dismissed the suit and passed an order in favour of the defendant in his petition (O.P.No.5 of 1977) for purchasing the land at the market value in accordance with the provisions of the Act. THE lower appellate Court reversed the said conclusion of the Court and held that the subject-matter of the lease was a land and building and that it was not a lease of a mere vacant land and therefore, the defendant was not entitled to the benefits of the Act. Consequently, the lower appellate Court decreed the suit.

(3.) THE next lease deed in favour of Durai was of 1.3.1952 evidenced by Ex.A1. It is on similar lines to Ex.A7. Here again, we find reference to both the land and the building.