T P BHASKAR RAO Vs. MOHAN ALIAS SADASIVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is directed against the judgment and decree dated 20.4.1994 rendered in R.C.A.No.705 of 1992 by the Rent Control Appellate Authority and the IV Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras thereby reversing the order of eviction dated 29.4.1992 passed by the Rent Controller and the XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras made in R.C.O.P.No.1111 of 1990.

(2.) TRACING the history of the above civil revision petition having come to be filed before this Court, what comes to be known is that the petitioner herein has filed an application before the Rent Controller and the XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras under Sec.10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking eviction of the tenant, the respondent herein, from the premises for his own occupation wherein the subject matter is the building located at Door No.65/2, Thambayya Reddy Street, West Mambalam,Chennai-33 on grounds such as that the petitioner is the lawful owner of the said premises, a portion of which has been let out for a monthly rent of Rs.550 for commercial purposes; that the petitioner himself is the tenant in another's building at Door No.117, Rangarajapuram Road, Kodambakkam,Chennai-24 and he is running a flour mill there and the landlord of the said premises is pestering the petitioner to vacate the premises and also filed R.C.O.P.No.758 of 1999 against the petitioner, which is pending; that at any moment, he might be asked to vacate the premises, in which event, he will have no place to run his flour mill and hence the subject matter of the petition being his own, is required for such purpose of shifting his flour mill to the premises in question in this petition; that on account of such necessity, the petitioner required the premises to be vacated by the respondent, but since he did not comply with, issuing the necessary notice, the petitioner has come forward to institute the R.C.O.P. proceedings before the Rent Controller.

(3.) AGGRIEVED, the respondent has preferred an appeal against the said order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, who had conducted his own enquiry into the matter, wherein the petitioner and the respondent were recalled and examined. Further, the petitioner marked five more documents on his side as Exs.P-4 to P-8. Ex.P-4 dated 4.9.1991 is a receipt for having received Rs.3,000 and Exs.P-5 to P-8 are the rental receipts issued on different dates of the year 1993.