M. RAMAKRISHNAN Vs. SARASWATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirming an order of the Rent Controller, directing eviction in R.C.O.P.No.2/96 filed by the respondent herein.

(2.) As could be seen from the available materials, the eviction petition was filed by the respondent herein for owner's occupation under S. 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act. The said petition was seriously contested by the petitioner herein. The learned Rent Controller passed an order of eviction, which resulted in the R.C.A. The said rent control appeal has also met the same fate. Aggrieved over the order in the R.C.A., the petitioner/tenant has brought forth this revision.

(3.) The only contention that was raised before the courts below was that there was no need for the owner's occupation; that the need that was put forth was false; that seeking the building for the purpose of having a tailoring shop was also false, and hence it should not be allowed. But, from the available evidence, it could be well seen, as rightly pointed out by both the authorities below, that it was required bona fide for the purpose of the tailoring profession, what was actually carried on in the veranda of the portion occupied by the landlady.