G S DHANDAPANI Vs. G D SELVARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these four civil revision petitions, tenants are the petitioners. They are aggrieved against the order of eviction passed by the learned Rent Controller which is confirmed by the learned Appellate Authority. The respondent in all these petitions is one and the same.

(2.) The respondent/landlord filed R.C.O.P.Nos.3,4, 5 and 7 of 2008 on the file of the Rent controller, Gobichettipalayam, against the respective tenants/petitioners herein, seeking eviction on the grounds of owners occupation, additional accommodation and demolition and reconstruction. The said applications were resisted by the tenants. It is their contention that both the grounds of owners occupation and demolition and reconstruction will not go together and therefore, there is no bonafide on the part of the landlord in claiming eviction. Apart from that, they resisted the application by denying the requirement of the landlord in respect of each grounds individually. After trial and during the course of argument, the landlord filed a Memo and an affidavit on 10.01.2011 and not pressed the relief claimed under section 10(3)(a)(iii) and 10(3)(c), however by maintaining the petition under section 14(1)(b) of the Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. The said memo filed was resisted by the tenants by filing a written objection on the very same day. However, the learned Rent Controller allowed the memo thereby restricting the eviction petitions only on the ground raised under section 14(1)(b). The said permission granted by the learned Rent Controller was not separately challenged. The learned Rent Controller considering the age of the building as more than 50 years and also by considering the fact that the landlord will get more income by way of reconstructing a new building and also by finding that the landlord has got sufficient means to put up construction, allowed the eviction petitions on the ground of demolition and reconstruction. The learned Rent Controller also found that the non furnishing of an approved plan will not be fatal to the application filed under section 14(1)(b).

(3.) The aggrieved tenants filed R.C.A.Nos.4,5,10 and 11 of 2011 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Gobichettipalayam. The Appellate Authority confirmed the finding of the Rent Controller and dismissed the appeals by her judgment and decree dated 21.11.2011. Aggrieved further by the said judgment and decree of the Appellate Authority, the tenants have filed these civil revision petitions.