THANKAMANI ALIAS LAKSHMY Vs. VIRAVUNNY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDER challenge in this revision filed by the tenant, an old lady, is the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court on the ground of arrears of rent and bona fide need for own occupation. In earlier litigations between the parties, the petitioner denied the landlord's title and that the issue was finally decided in favour of the landlord the predecessor in interest. Even though in the present rent control petition also the same issue was raked up, the learned statutory authorities have rightly decided the issue in favour of the landlord.

(2.) THOUGH bona fides of the need was disputed and the allegation regarding the arrears of rent was also disputed, the Rent Control Court on evaluating the evidence adduced by the parties came to the conclusion that the need was bona fide. Even the protection of the second proviso to subs section (3) of Section 11 claimed by the revision petitioner was decided against the revision petitioner on the reason that the purpose of lease was residential.

(3.) PER contra, Sri.T.M.Chandran, who has already lodged a caveat on behalf of the respondent/landlord, submitted that there is no warrant at all for interfering with the judgment of the Appellate Authority in view of the attenuated nature of the jurisdiction in which we are presently sitting.