RAJU Vs. E V RAMASWAMI NAICKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant is the petitioner in this revision in which he challenges the order of eviction passed by the learned District Judge of Coimbatore on the ground of default by him in the payment of rent. The petitioner, tenant, had been carrying on his business as a baker at Erode in the premises belonging to the respondent for over 30 years paying a rent of Rs. 7 per month. While so, the respondent landlord filed on 15-6-1949 B. R. C. No. 88 of 1949 before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode, who was the Rent Controller for the area, for the eviction of the petitioner from the premises on the allegation that

(2.) The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rent Controller, dismissed the landlord's application by his order dated 28-12-1950 as not 'bona fide' holding that the agreement as to the time for the payment of rent pleaded by the tenant had been made out. In regard to the claim to set off the expenses incurred in connection with the repairs to the building against the rent due the Rent Controller found that the repairs had been effected but that the agent of the landlord with whoso consent they were executed had not the requisite authority to bind his principal and that consequently the tenant was not entitled to the set off claimed by him.

(3.) The landlord took up the matter in appeal, C. M. A. No. 28 of 1951 on the file of the Sub Court, Coimbatore, and the learned Subordinate Judge after referring to the failure of the landlord to give evidence in the case accepted the uncontradicted testimony of the tenant as to the agreement pleaded and found that there had been no default in the payment of rent and dismissed the landlord's appeal. From this decision dated 2G-3-1951 the landlord preferred a revision petition to the District Court under Section 12-B, Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1951 and (he learned District Judge accepting the revision, reversed the order of the Rent Controller and the Subordinate Judge and ordered eviction and the present civil revision petition is against this order.