P S MOHAMED ALI Vs. S GOVINDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners, who are tenants, are the respondents in R.C.O.P.Nos.9 and 10 of 1999 before the learned Rent Controller, Tiruvannamalai, laid by the respondents herein for eviction of the revision petitioners under Sections 10(2)(iii), 10(2), 10(3)(a)(iii) and Sections 10(2)(iii), 10(2), 10(3) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') respectively, based on the alleged family partition of the respondents herein.

(2.) Pending the above R.C.O.Ps, the revision petitioners/tenants filed interim applications, viz., I.A.Nos.8 and 9 of 2001 in R.C.O.P.Nos.9 and 10 of 1999 respectively, before the learned Rent Controller, Tiruvannamalai, under Section 19 of the Act, to reject the said R.C.O.P.Nos.9 and 10 of 1999, placing reliance on the order dated 1.9.1995 made in R.C.O.P.No.15 of 1994 on the file of the learned Rent Controller, Tiruvannamamali, which was subsequently confirmed by the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority, Tiruvannamalai by order dated 20.7.1998 in R.C.A.No.16 of 1995.

(3.) The learned Rent Controller, Tiruvannamalai, by order even dated 13.6.2002 in I.A.Nos.8 and 9 of 2001 in H.R.C.O.P.Nos.9 and 10 of 1999 respectively, refused to reject the R.C.O.Ps. exercising the powers conferred under Section 19 of the Act. Hence, the above revisions.