G.MOHAN Vs. DURGABAI DESHMUKH MAHILA SABHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant, who has suffered concurrently before the Rent Controller, as well as the Appellate Authority, is the revision petitioner.

(2.) I have heard Mr.V.Manohar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and M/s.Aparajitha Vishwanath, learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) Mr.V.Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that the Courts below have committed a concurrent error in entertaining the eviction petition in the first place, since it was a case of a composite lease, which is exempt from the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. He would further state that even otherwise the respondent was lacking in bonafides and had not occupied other vacant portions and made only therefore, the requirement for own use and occupation was clearly malafide and with an intention to some how or the other evict the petitioner from the tenanted premises.