K SANKAR Vs. G L VIJAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.7.1987 made in R.C.A.No.10 of 1993 by the Rent Control Appellate Authority and the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Madurai, though reversing the fair and decretal order dated 15.12.1992 made in R.C.O.P.No.215 of 1986 by the Rent Controller and Additional District Munsif, Madurai.

(2.) THE landlord has filed the rent control original application before the Rent Controller against his tenant for eviction of the premises bearing door No.60 of South Avani Moola Street, Madurai Town, under Secs.10(3)(a)(iii) and 10(2)(vii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on averments that the said premises belongs to him under a Will dated 9.2.1951, that since being a minor the property was looked after by his father Kanagavel; that the respondent became the tenant of the premises for running his lorry booking office on terms that he would pay a monthly rent of Rs.200 being the premises on lease for non-residential purposes without subletting the same to any other person and on paying an advance amount of Rs.1,500 thus, the respondent enjoying the property as a lessee for the last 9 years; that the petitioner having attained majority, took over the management of the properties, including the petition premises that having prepared an agreement for the said lease, the petitioner/landlord sent the same to be considered by the respondent/tenant and to be signed, but the same had not been sent back duly signed by him, that the respondent filed R.C.O.P.No.607 of 1985 seeking permission to deposit the rents in the court and agreeing to receive the rent upto December, 1985, the petitioner required the respondent to remit the rents direct, from the month of January, 1986 and the same was compelled with by money order.

(3.) AGGRIEVED, the respondent/tenant has preferred an appeal in R.C.A.No.10 of 1993 before the rent control appellate authority and the said authority having framed two specific points, viz., (i) whether there are reasonable grounds to allow the appeal setting aside the fair and decretal order of the Rent Controller and (ii) to what relief, if any, is the appellant entitled and having taken up the subject for discussion, appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, would ultimately allow the appeal deciding that the building is not at all necessary for the landlord to start an industry and the said claim of the landlord is not bona fide thus deciding the first point in allowing the appeal and setting aside the fair and decretal order passed by the Rent Controller with costs. It is only challenging the said judgment and decree passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, the landlord as the petitioner, has come forward to file the above C.R.P. on certain grounds as brought forth in the grounds of memorandum of C.R.P.