B VENKATESAN Vs. M K SELVARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Inveighing the order dated 21.03.2005 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam (Rent Control Appellate Authority) in RCA No.2 of 2005 confirming the order and decreetal dated 25.11.2004 passed by the learned District Munsif, Nagapattinam (Rent Control Authority) in RCOP No.7 of 2002, this civil revision petition is focussed.

(2.) Heard both sides.

(3.) Broadly but briefly, narratively but precisely, the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary for the disposal of this civil revision petition would run thus: The revision petitioner/landlord filed the RCOP for evicting the respondent/tenant on the ground of demolition of the building in the demised premises and for raising a new construction for putting the property into more beneficial use and also on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent. The Rent Controller after hearing both sides dismissed the application. Whereupon, RCA No.2 of 2005 was filed, which was also dismissed. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the orders of both the courts below, this revision has been focussed on various grounds, the epitome and the long and short of them would run thus: - Both the courts below failed to take into account the bona fide requirement of the landlord to get the building in the demised premises demolished and construct in his entire vacant site a double storied building so as to put it into more beneficial use. But both the courts below approached the matter wrongly and simply believed the version of the respondent as though the property was not required for a genuine purpose and that there emerged virtually between them an usufructuary mortgage transaction relating to the same property.