M. KARUPPANNA GOUNDER Vs. C. VISUVASAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is by the tenant in R.C.O.P. No. 5 of 1987, on the file of Rent Controller (Principal District Munsif), Karur. Both the Rent Controller as well as the Appellate Authority has directed the petitioner to vacate the demised premises on the ground that he has committed acts of waste, which have materially impaired the value and utility of the building.

(2.) In the eviction petition, in paragraph 10, the original landlady Michael Ammal has said that the tenant, petitioner herein, has made some alterations without permission and put the building into a different user and also committed acts of waste which have materially impaired the value and utility of the building and, therefore, the tenant is liable to be evicted on that ground.

(3.) The said allegation is answered in paragraph 4 of the counter wherein the tenant has said that he has not made use of the building for any other purpose, nor has he committed any acts of waste. He has also said that he has not done any act which is likely to impair materially the value and utility of the building. The allegation that he has committed acts of waste is also denied.