Vadivel vs Kamalanathan – sllr 2004 volume 3 page 216

The case between the plaintiff-respondent (landowner) and the defendant-appellant (original occupier) concerned the establishment of a tenancy and the legal effect of accepting money and issuing receipts under duress. The court determined that the mere acceptance of money or issuance of receipts, when compelled by police coercion, does not create a valid tenancy absent mutual consent. It was reaffirmed that consent is a necessary component of contract formation, with reliance placed on relevant statutes and precedents to guide the determination. The primacy of Tamil language answers in proceedings under Article 24 of the Constitution was reaffirmed when discrepancies emerged in translations, emphasizing the authoritative nature of proceedings conducted in the specified language. The appeal