SHAHJAHAN Vs. JANATH ASHRAF UDUMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant, who failed concurrently before the Courts below, in resisting the Rent Control Original Petition in 5 of 1987 on the file of the Rent Controller and the District Munsif, Srivaikuntam, is the revision petitioner.

(2.) THE respondent/landlord, as petitioner, has moved, the Rent Controller for the eviction of the tenant/revision petitioner) on the grounds of wilful default in payment of rents, that the tenant had damaged the building, causing acts of waste and that the building is required for the personal occupation of his son, invoking the provisions of Sections 10(2)(i), 10(2)(iii) and 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") though the Secti ons were not so quoted, as seen from the Rent Control Original Petition.

(3.) THE learned Rent Control Appellate Authority, while evaluating the materials available on record and by going through the eviction order passed by the Rent Controller, having heard the arguments of either counsel, felt no reason to interfere with the findings of the Rent Controller. Thus, satisfying himself, the Rent Controller has not committed any error offending any provisions of the law, either on facts or otherwise, unable to take a different view, the Appellate Authority confirmed the eviction order, by dismissing the R.C.A., as per the judgment dated 19.2.2003, which is challenged in this revision.