CHINNAIYAPILLAI Vs. SELVAGANESHRAJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these Revision Petitions were filed by the tenants against the common judgment made by the rent control appellate authority on 4. 4. 2000 in RCA Nos. 842 of 1996, 844 to 847 of 1996. The respondent herein as landlord filed RCOP Nos. 2961 to 2969 of 1991 and RCOP Nos. 2971 and 2977 of 1991 against various persons on the ground of willful default and also for the purpose of demolition and reconstruction.

(2.) ALL the respondents in RCOP Nos. 2966 to 2969, RCOP nos. 2971 to 2973 of 1991 did not contest the rent control proceedings and the rent controller dismissed them. Insofar as the other RCOPs. , were concerned the rent controller found that there was no landlord-tenant relationship between the respondent herein and the tenants in the RCOPs. , and therefore dismissed the rent control proceedings. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the rent control proceedings against some of the persons, the respondent herein filed RCA nos. 842, 844 to 848 of 1996. The appellate authority by order dated 4. 4. 2000 allowed all the appeals and ordered eviction on both the grounds willful default and demolition and reconstruction and aggrieved by the same the tenants in RCA Nos. 842/1996 and 844 to 847 of 1996 have filed the above five Civil revision Petitions.

(3.) THE appellate authority by re-appreciating the evidence found that the claim of landlord-tenant relationship by the persons are not bona fide and they have not proved that they put up the superstructure in which they are residing. He further found fault with the revision petitioners for not examining the said A. Natarajan to prove their case. THE appellate authority also held that the persons could not be considered as trespassers and therefore there is a landlord-tenant relationship and on that basis the appellate authority allowed the appeals and ordered eviction.