PARIMALA PRABHAKAR Vs. MRS MADAN BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LANDLADY in R.C.O.P. 1394 of 1990 on the file of X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai is the revision petitioner.

(2.) SUBJECT matter of the eviction petition reads thus, "Premises bearing Door No. 21, Easwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Madras - 33 consisting of front side one shop 4 rooms and lavottory bathroom excluding, the garage, open spaces in the front and rear sides."

(3.) BEFORE going into the merits of the case, the scope of the relevant provisions of the Act is to be considered. Section 10(3)(a)(i) says, "Sec. 10(3)(a) - A landlord may, subject to the provisions of clauses (d) apply to the Controller for an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building. (i) in case it is residential building, if the landlord requires it for his own occupation or for the occupation of (any member of his family) and if he or (any member of his family) is not occupying a residential building of his own in the city, town or village concerned. (ii) Section 10(3)(c) reads thus, (iii) "A landlord who is occupying only a part of a building, whether residential or non-residential, may notwithstanding anything contained in clause(a), apply to the Controller for an order directing any tenant occupying the whole or any portion of the remaining part of the building to put the landlord in possession thereof, if he requires additional accommodation for residential purposes or for purposes of a business which he is carrying on, as the case may be." Tamil