ROHINI PREMKUMARI Vs. ANNAMALAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The landlady is the revision petitioner in both civil revision petitions.

(2.) The landlady filed two separate petitions against her tenants, viz. Annamalai and Manikumar in RCOP.Nos.3988 and 3989 of 1986 respectively, for eviction of the tenants under Section 10(3)(a)(iii) on one and the same ground, that she requires the petition premises for her own use and occupation, for starting a Consultancy Clinic, in the petition premises and both the petitions came to be dismissed by the Rent Controller by order and decree dated 28.2.1991 and the same was confirmed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority in RCA.Nos.571 and 572 of 1992, on the file the 9th Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras. Aggrieved by the same, the landlady has preferred these civil revision petitions.

(3.) The brief facts of the case is as follows:- Annamalai, the respondent in RCOP.No.3988/2003 is the tenant, occupying Shop Nos.2 and 3 in the premises, bearing Door No.33, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Madras-8 on a monthly rent of Rs.560/-, which is according to the English Calendar month, and the tenancy is for non residential purpose.