M RAGHAVAN Vs. M PARTHASARTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) THIS revision has been preferred against the Judgment in RCA. No. 511 of 2004 on the file of the Court of VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, which had arisen out of an order of eviction in R. C. O. P. No. 1394 of 2002 passed by the learned Rent Controller ( XII Judge), Court of Small Causes, Chennai under Section 10 (2) (1) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent from April 2002 to 31. 7. 2002. Both the Courts below have concurrently held that the tenant had committed wilful default in payment of rent.

(3.) IT is a well settled proposition of law that unless it is shown that the findings of the Courts below is perverse and the Courts have failed to consider the materials placed before them, it is not open to this Court, while exercising revisional power, cannot interfere with the concurrent findings of the Courts below.