GNANASUNDARAM Vs. K V SUKUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent filed R.C.O.P. No.535 of 1982 for eviction on the ground of Sec.10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings Lease and Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) THE facts that have led to this civil revision petition shall be briefly narrated. THE respondent sought eviction of one K.R.Jayasingh on the ground that he along with his father and brothers were doing business as partners in the manufacture and sale of "appalam"; they were occupying a rented premises and the landlord of that building obtained an order of eviction; this was confirmed by the Supreme Court; since it was no longer possible to continue in the rented premises, eviction was sought for on the ground of owner's use and occupation; Eviction was ordered.

(3.) MR.Prabhakaran, learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submitted that the issue whether the respondent was carrying on business or intended to carry on business had all been accepted by this Court before the order of remand. The only question that had to be considered after remand by this Court was whether the need was bona fide. The Appellate Authority had found that the need was bona fide. To interfere in revision it had to be established that the impugned order was either illegal or improper. The Court cannot sit in appeal and sift the entire evidence once again in the absence of any illegality or impropriety. He also submitted that the conduct of the petitioner leaves much to be desired. Before the Rent Controller all that the petitioner had said was there was no such address, A100, Anna Nagar. This objection was rejected by the Appellate Authority and on facts it was found that the respondent bona fide required the premises for his use and occupation. It is now the petitioner's case that there is such an address, but the respondent is not carrying on business in that address. This according to the respondent was not a subsequent event, but a new case and this cannot be countenanced by this Court. The learned counsel referred to M/s.Boston and others v. S.A.Akbar and others M/s.Boston and others v. S.A.Akbar and others (1998)1 MLJ. 270.