FAKIR MOHIDEEN Vs. CHITRAPUTIRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 1998 on the file of the Rent Controller, District Munsif Court, Sivagiri is the revision petitioner. THE petition was filed on 27.1.1993 and renumbered as R.C.O.P.No.3 of 1998. THE landlord sought eviction of the tenant on the ground that the schedule building which is non-residential in nature is required for bona fide occupation of his son who is a Medical Practitioner. THE landlord son has completed his medical education and has to conduct a clinic in the scheduled premises.

(2.) THEREAFTER an amendment application was filed seeking eviction on the ground that the tenant had defaulted in paying the rent. After taking evidence the Rent Controller held that the landlord is not entitled to get possession on the ground that his son requires the scheduled premises for his own occupation. The reason for holding the claim is not bona fide was at the time when the landlord was examined he stated that his son is employed at Ajmeer and is residing there with his family. In regard to the claim for eviction on the ground of default in the payment of rent, the Rent Controller held that even though such a claim was made by the landlord in the notice itself, the non-payment for years together will an amount to wilful default though the same was not a ground for eviction initially. It is further found by the rend controller that amendment application was filed in the year 1997 and even at that time the tenant did not tender rent and the amount was deposited only one year after. Hence the Rent Controller held that the tenant was indefault in paying the rent and the same is wilful. Eviction is ordered.

(3.) LANDLORD claimed eviction on the ground that his son requires the schedule building for his own occupation, he wants to conduct a clinic he being a qualified medical practitioner.