9911796707
TMI Blog1950 (2) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilding in Ellis Road, Mount Road, Madras. He sought the eviction of the two petitioners before us who were occupying the ground floor and the first floor of the building respectively. The ground on which the petition was based was that the respondent required the building for his own occupation. He alleged that he was not occupying a residential building of his own in the city. The Rent Controller dismissed the petition against the petitioner in C. M. P. No. 7472 of 1949 but ordered the eviction of the petitioner in C M. P. No. 7678. There were two appeals, one by the landlord and another by the petitioner in C. M. P. No. 7678 of 1949. Both the appeals were heard together by the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes who directed both the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... andlord thereupon made the following endorsement on the appeal memorandum. This appeal is withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition after giving notice. In consequence of this endowment, the Court dismissed appeal as withdrawn. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that under Section 12 (4) of the Act the order of the Controller is final subject only to the decision of the appellate authority and as the appellate authority did not upset the order of the Controller, the latter became final and the issues decided by the Controller must be deemed to have been finally decided within the meaning of the provisions of Section 10. Mr. Somasundaram for the landlord-respondent on the other hand contended that once the appeal was filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... second wife of the landlord is residing with her father and mother and others. The landlord himself is residing in a rented house with his first wife. He goes to stay sometimes in the house in which his second wife is living. Sometimes both the wives would live together. Sometimes they quarreled. At the time of the application they had quarrelled and did not agree to live in the game house. 4. On the above facts can it be held that the landlord is not occupying a residential building of his own? The learned Chief Judge considered that the fiction of the unity of spouses in the eye of the law does not necessarily drive one to hold that a much-married husband should be deemed to be residing at every place where any of his wives is r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esided because shortly after the purchase of the house he became of unsound mind and was removed to a mental house. It was held that the testator was the occupier of the house at the time of his death and that his widow was therefore entitled to the proceeds of the sale of the house. In The King V. Ditcheat, (1829) 9 B. C. 176 : 109 E. R. 66, Littledale J. said : There is a material difference between a holding and an occupation. A person may hold though he does not occupy. A tenant of a freehold is a person who holds of another ; he does not necessarily occupy. In order to occupy, a party must be personally resident by himself or his family. The following observations of Moore L. J. in an Irish case (Martin Estates Co., Ltd. v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
