N. RATHINASAMY Vs. S. LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED over the fair and decretal order passed in R.C.A. No.39 of 2012 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Principal Subordinate Court, Tiruchirapalli, in reversing the fair and decretal order passed in R.C.O.P. No.68 of 2010, on the file of the Rent Controller, II Additional District Munsif Court, Tiruchirapalli, the tenant has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) THE petitioner is the tenant and the landlady is the respondent. The landlady filed R.C.O.P. No.68 of 2010 for eviction on the ground of willful default and owner's occupation. Admittedly the monthly rent was Rs.1,750/ -. In the petition, the landlady has stated that the tenant was irregular in paying the monthly rent and that he committed willful default. With regard to owner's occupation, the landlady has stated that in the month of June 2009, she requested the tenant to vacate the property, since she was in need of her house to settle at Srirangam in the old age to have dharsan of Lord Renganathan and to have a peaceful life. Since the tenant did not vacate the premises, the landlady has filed the R.C.O.P.

(3.) BEFORE the Rent Controller on the side of the landlady, she was examined as P.W.1 and two documents viz., Exs.P.1 and P.2 were marked and on the side of the respondent, he was examined as R.W.1 and six documents viz., Exs.R.1 to R.6 were marked. The Rent Controller, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidences let in by both the parties, found that the tenant had not committed any default much less willful default in paying the monthly rent to the landlady and also found that the averments stated in the affidavit for eviction on the ground of owner's occupation is not sufficient to order eviction. On this finding, the Rent Controller dismissed the R.C.O.P.