R GOVINDARAJ Vs. N G VENKATESWARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant is the petitioner in this civil revision petition. The respondent herein is the landlord as at present; his father (who is now no more) filed the eviction petition against the petitioner herein for the purpose of getting additional accommodation under Section 10 (3) (c) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent control) Act.

(2.) THE petitioner herein has been a tenant under the father of the respondent herein occupying a portion, viz, a small shop portion measuring 2' x 5' in premises no. 16 Govindappa Naick St. , G. T. Madras, on a monthly rent of Rs. 20. The petitioner is carrying on a business in the said portion as electrician. The father of the respondent was carrying on business in stationery and general stores in a portion in the ground floor of the said premises, No. 16 Govindappa Naick St. , and required the portion in the occupation of the petitioner herein also, bona fide for his additional accommodation. The Rent Controller dismissed the eviction petition. On appeal to the Third Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, eviction was ordered on the finding that the respondent required the building under the occupation of the petitioner bona fide for his additional accommodation. The appellate authority has taken into account the increase in the business turnover of the respondent and has come to the conclusion that the business of the respondent requires additional accommodation.

(3.) IT cannot be said that the decision arrived at by the appellate authority is not based upon any evidence. The appellate authority has discussed the bona fides of the requirements of the respondent as also the balance of convenience as between the parties and after properly appreciating the evidence on record and taking into consideration the balance of convenience, has ordered eviction.