M. RATHINAVELU Vs. S. UDAYASANKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil decision has been preferred against the order, dated 11.1.1997 in R.C.A. No. 674 of 1991 on the file of the VII Assistant Judge, Court of Small Cause, Madras confirming the Order of the Rent Controller, X Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, dated 19.11.1990 in R.C.O.P. No. 3403 of 1986.

(2.) The respondent filed the petition for eviction under Ss. 10(2)(a)(i) and 14(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act and on other grounds. After considering the evidence the Rent Controller allowed the petitioner for eviction on the ground of default and demolition. As against that order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority also concurred with the Rent Controller and found that there was wilful default in the payment of rent and the building is required for immediate demolition. Hence he has also confirmed the order of eviction. As against the said order the revision petition has been filed by the tenant.

(3.) The main points urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner are Firstly, the petitioner became a tenant in 1935 in respect of a very big building consisting of land and superstructure. Now the petition has been filed only for a portion of the building. He was not aware of the partition and he has not attorned the tenancy in respect of this specific portion of the building to the petitioner. Hence the petition itself is not maintainable.