By an Order dated 19 th December, 1998 the Rent Controller passed an order of eviction.
Admittedly, the tenancy companymence with effect from 1 th July, 1988.
By this Order it has been held that the Appellant had defaulted in payment of rent.
3,000/ was paid as advance.
The money order companyes back with endorsement Addressee number found.
Against this Order the Appellant filed R.C.A. No.
The Appellant companytested this application.
1643 of 1989 for depositing rent in the Court.
A sum of Rs.
The Appellant claimed that he had sent a money order which was refused by the Respondent.
From that it is clear that the Respondent has number refused to accept the money order.
The Respondent claimed that the Appellant had defaulted in making the payment of rent from the very first month itself.
The Respondent filed R.C.O.P. No.
The Order of the Rent Controller directing eviction has been restored.
3,600/ .
300/ .
The Respondent then filed a Revision in the High Court which had been allowed by the impugned Order dated 4th November, 1997.
The Appellant was to pay every monthly a rent Rs.
The Appellant claimed that the landlord had number replied and thus he had thereafter filed R.C.O.P. No.
The Respondent claimed that there were arrears of rent in the sum of Rs.
The Appellant was given 3 months time to vacate.
2210 of 1989 before the Rent Controller,Madras under Section 10 2 1 of the Tamil Nandu Buildings Lease and Rent Control Act, 1960 hereinafter referred to as the said Act .
The Appellant claim that he had sent a Notice dated 13 th November, 1988 calling upon the landlord to disclose his bank account into which rent may be deposited.
N. Variava, J. This Appeal is against an Order dated 4 th November, 1997.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows The Appellant was inducted by the Respondent as tenant in the companycerned premises with effect from 1 st July, 1988.
306 of 1991 which was allowed by an Order dated 13 th April, 1993.
