S SELVARAJAN Vs. A K SAKTHIVEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE civil revision petition has been filed against the order of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Srivilliputhur, in R.C.A.No.40 of 1991 on his file confirming the order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller, Sattur, in R.C.O.P.No.21 of 1990.

(2.) THE revision petitioner's eviction was sought on the ground of owner's occupation.

(3.) I heard counsel, perused the relevant orders. There is overwhelming documentary evidence to show that the first respondent really intended to carry on business in the property. As early as 11.2.1989 the first respondent wrote a letter to the revision petitioner under Ex.A-2 calling upon him to quit and deliver vacant possession of the property as it was required for his own use and occupation. Ex.A-5 is the receipt issued by the Telephone Department in favour of the first respondent and Ex.A-6 is the demand notice issued by the same department. Ex.A-11 is the true copy of the telegram given by the first respondent to the revision petitioner to vacate the premises on 13.8.1989. This was followed by a lawyer notice under Ex.A-12. Ex.A-21 is the certificate of registration under the Sales Tax Rules, 1957. The premises mentioned in Ex.A-21 is 112, ICA Colony, Virudhunagar, belonging to one Mythili. It is also stated in Ex.A-21 that the first respondent is dealing in black gram, coriander, toor, orid, green gram, palmyrah sandy, PVC pipes and accessories, GI pipes and fittings, paddy, rice, etc. Ex.A-26 is the summons received from the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer-II, Virudhunagar, addressed to the first respondent at 112, ICA Colony, Virudhunagar. Ex.A-27 is the assessment order in respect of Sakthi Rani Traders belonging to the first respondent for the year 1989-90 and the address given is 112, ICA Colony, Virudhunagar. The landlady has written a letter to the first respondent on 5.3.1990 calling upon him to vacate the premises as he was using the residential premises for non-residential purposes. This was Ex.A-31 and Ex.A-32 to the reply sent by the first respondent, Ex.A-24, is the cash book maintained by the first respondent for the business, viz. Sakthi Rani Traders, Ex.A-25 is the ledger maintained by the concern. Ex.A-28 is the cash book for the year 1990-91. Ex.A-29 is the ledger pertaining to Ex.A-28. These exhibits clearly show that the first respondent was carrying on business in a rented premises. It is also evident from the various documents that he was assessed under the Central Sales Tax Act and the State Commercial Tax Act. The revision petitioner also had not denied that the first respondent was carrying on business in a residential property and the landlady had taken the rise of action under the Rent Control Act for having allowed the first respondent to run his business in residential premises. R.W.2 had also deposed that the department officials inspected the premises maintained by the first respondent at No. 112, ICA Colony, Virudhunagar. Thus the various documents and the oral evidence clearly established that the first respondent was carrying on business in a rented premises at Door No. 112, ICA Colony Virudhunagar. The bonafide of the first respondent as rightly held by the authorities below had been clearly established. May be the first respondent originally said through notice that he required the premises for the use of his son. But, it does not mean that he could not change his requirement as for his own occupation for non-residential purposes. The materials on record clearly show that the first respondent had made out a case for own occupation. The conclusion reached by the authorities below cannot be taken exception to. There are no merits in the civil revision petition and the same is dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.