<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (10) TMI 576 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169756</link>
    <description>The Tamil Nadu City Tenants&#039; Protection Act, 1921 confers a conditional right on a tenant to seek purchase of the land, but only after a mandatory enquiry into whether any portion is required for convenient enjoyment and, if so, the minimum extent and price. The High Court could not direct eviction in writ proceedings without first applying that statutory procedure, because the tenant&#039;s protections under Sections 3 and 9 could not be bypassed by summary jurisdiction. The precedent relied upon was inapplicable since the relevant statutory provisions were not considered on its facts. The eviction directions were therefore unsustainable, and the dispute had to proceed under the Tenants Act before the proper forum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2025 17:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383684" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 576 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169756</link>
      <description>The Tamil Nadu City Tenants&#039; Protection Act, 1921 confers a conditional right on a tenant to seek purchase of the land, but only after a mandatory enquiry into whether any portion is required for convenient enjoyment and, if so, the minimum extent and price. The High Court could not direct eviction in writ proceedings without first applying that statutory procedure, because the tenant&#039;s protections under Sections 3 and 9 could not be bypassed by summary jurisdiction. The precedent relied upon was inapplicable since the relevant statutory provisions were not considered on its facts. The eviction directions were therefore unsustainable, and the dispute had to proceed under the Tenants Act before the proper forum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169756</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>