(1.) The present Civil Revision Petitions are filed to set-aside the judgment and decree dtd. 29/6/2022 passed in R.C.A.Nos.826, 825, 824, 823 of 2022 and 337 of 2019 by the Hon'ble VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, confirming the orders and decrees dtd. 8/10/2018 in R.C.O.P.Nos.133, 132, 131, 130 & 136 of 2014 by the Rent Controller (Hon'ble X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai) respectively.
(2.) The petitioners are the tenants under the respondent. The petitioners are paying the rent regularly and there is no arrears of rent due to the respondent/landlord. On earlier occasion, the respondent/landlord filed a petition for fixation of fair rent for the portion of the premises occupied by the revision petitioners, contending that the premises was in good and tenantable condition. Accordingly, fair rent was fixed and the rent fixed was being paid by the revision petitioners without any arrears. While so, the respondent/landlord filed R.C.O.P.Nos.133, 132, 131, 130 & 136 of 2014 before the Rent Controller (Hon'ble X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai) for eviction of the premises rented out. The reason for eviction as stated by the respondent/landlord is for demolition and reconstruction of the building. The Rent Control Original Petitions filed by the respondent/landlord were allowed and the revision petitioners / tenants filed Rent Control Appeals before the Rent Control Appellate Authority/VII Court of Small Causes, Chennai, which were as also dismissed, against which, the present revision petitions are filed.
(3.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revision petitioners mainly contended that though the building is old and in a dilapidated condition, the trial Court and the Appellate Court failed to consider the fact that the Advocate Commissioner was not appointed to examine the condition of the building. Per contra, Civil Engineer's report was taken into consideration in order to support the case of the respondent/landlord and thus, the orders are perverse and to be set aside.