N MOORTHY Vs. M SIVAPRAKASAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition is preferred against the order dated 08.04.1997 passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority (III Additional District Judge), Pondicherry in M.A.No.32 of 1994, ordering Eviction of the Revision Petitioner / Tenant. The Tenant is the Revision Petitioner.

(2.) FOR convenience, the parties are referred to as per their original rank in H.R.C.O.P.No.29 of 1993.

(3.) UPON consideration of the averments and the evidence adduced by the parties, learned Rent Controller found that the evidence of P.Ws.2 and 3 showing that the Petitioner's Son Vinayagam @ Baskar carries on business is not acceptable. Learned Rent Controller was of the view that P.Ws.2 and 3 have been brought up for the purposes of the case and Ex.A.4 has also been created for bolstering the claim of the Petitioner. Finding that the Landlord can maintain the Petition for Eviction only if it is proved that the Landlord or his son are proved to be carrying on business on the date of the Petition, learned Rent Controller dismissed the Application for Eviction.