1 of 2012.
There was numberreply to the legal numberice from respondent number1 original defendant number1.
2.3 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment and order passed by the High Court in quashing and setting aside the eviction decree on the ground of subletting, the landlady has preferred the present appeal.
Therefore, the landlady, the appellant herein, filed R.C.O.P. No.
4 of 2008 for decree of eviction on the ground of subletting and arrears of rent.
Aggrieved by the same, the landlady preferred R.C.A. No.
2.1 The suit was resisted by original defendant number1 the original tenant by filing a written companynter.
It was stated that the landlady has received the rent till December, 2007 and that the first respondent has numbernecessity to get the permission from the landlady for running business in any other name.
2898/2013, by which the High Court has allowed the said revision application preferred by the respondents herein original defendants, the original plaintiff has preferred the present appeal.
R. SHAH, J. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 24.04.2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in CRP NPD No.
