P S JANAKAVALLI AMMAL Vs. REGIONAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petition is filed by the landlady represented by power of attorney agent challenging the fair and decretal orders in R.C.A.No.1 of 1994 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Principal Subordinate Judge), Chengalpattu reversing the fair and decretal orders passed by the Rent Controller (District Munsif), Madurantakam in R.C.O.P.No.4 of 1993.

(2.) The petition under Section 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as Tamil Nadu Act 18 of 1960) was laid for eviction of the tenant/respondent from the petition premises on the ground of bona fide requirement of the premises for carrying on the business of the grandson of the landlady. The respondent resisted the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the same is not bona fide. The learned Rent Controller having analysed the evidence adduced on either side and after considering the arguments held that the claim made by the landlady is bona fide. The respondent preferred the appeal before the Rent Control Appellate Authority and the learned Subordinate Judge having analysed the evidence on record and upon hearing the arguments of both sides allowed the appeal holding that the claim of the landlady is not bona fide. Hence, the revision.

(3.) The petition premises in Door No.23-C at G.S.T. Road, Madurantakam was let out by the landlady to the respondent on a monthly rent of Rs.1,000/- for non-residential purpose. The power of attorney agent who is the son of the landlady filed the petition as he is managing the petition premises on behalf of the landlady. Both of them are residing on the eastern wing of the premises in Door No.5 and are doing retail business in the western portion of the same building. According to the landlady, her grandson who has been given wholesale agency in respect of the consumer products of number of leading industrial houses has been accommodated to run the agency business in a cramped room between the said shop and the house. Since there is crunch of space for running the agency business of her grandson, the landlady through her power of attorney agent requested the respondent to vacate the premises, but the respondent has failed to vacate the premises.