SHA UKCHAND Vs. YOGESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE civil revision petitioner is the respondent/tenant in R.C.O.P.No.199 of 2000 on the file of the learned Rent Controller viz., the District Munsif, Coimbatore.

(2.) THE civil revision petitioner/tenant is the appellant in RCA No.9 of 2003 on the file of the learned Rent Control Appellate Authority viz., the Principal Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore. The respondent/landlord/petitioner filed R.C.O.P.No.199 of 2000 on the file learned Rent Controller, Coimbatore under Section 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act of 1960 praying for an order of eviction directing the tenant/appellant/revision petitioner to vacate the petition mentioned property and hand over vacant possession of the same. The respondent/landlord/petitioner filed the aforesaid RCOP petition claiming the petition mentioned property for his own occupation, for a non residential purpose. The revision petitioner/appellant/tenant filed a counter inter alia stating that the petition lacks merits and that the respondent/landlord is already running a shop dealing in Electrical in the same premises and number of shops are vacant in the premises and that the respondent/landlord/petitioner is having two shops on the first floor and kept under lock and key and further that the landlord in occupation of a non residential area is not entitled for possession of the premises and that the respondent/landlord is having a shop in the first floor and is not visible and that the work done by the landlord is only servicing which requires no visibility but only skilled persons and equipments to work and that the petition has been filed with an ulterior motive, with a hidden trick of making the revision petitioner/appellant/tenant to vacate the premises.

(3.) BEFORE the learned Appellate Authority viz., the Principal Sub Judge, Coimbatore, the revision petitioner/appellant/tenant preferred RCA No.9 of 2003.