DHANASEKARAN Vs. A R C SCHOOL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition arises out of a reversing order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority.

(2.) HEARD Mr. S. Subbiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/tenant and Mr. T.R. Rajaraman, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/landlord.

(3.) TAKING up the first contention, relating to the maintainability of the Petition for eviction, on the basis of the Notification issued by the Government in exercise of the power conferred under Section 29 of the Act, it is admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the plea of the maintainability was not raised in the eviction proceedings, either before the Rent Controller or before the Appellate Authority. However, the learned counsel submitted that being a pure question of law, it could be decided even on the basis of the admitted pleadings on record by this Court. In support of his contention that the plea could be raised as it is a pure question of law, the learned counsel relied upon the decision of Justice Sardar Zackria Hussain in S. Kulandaivelu v. Sowrashtra Vipra Sabha, Namakkal, 2004 (4) LW 474.