SUBBIAH PANDIAN Vs. C BALASUNDARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the request of the counsel for either side, the above Second Appeal and Civil Revision Petition were ordered to be consolidated. In the Second Appeal, notice of motion was ordered on 20.12.1999. The respondents have been served. The C.R.P. came up for admission subsequently and as per the orders of S.S. Subramani, J., both the matters were ordered to be consolidated.

(2.) HEARD Mr. A. Sankarasubramanian, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in the Second Appeal as well as the petitioner in the revision petition and Mr. P. Peppin Fernando, learned counsel appearing for the respondent in the Second Appeal and in the revision petition.

(3.) PER contra, Mr. P. Peppin Fernando, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-landlord contended that the two authorities below ordered eviction holding that the requirement of the landlord for his brother's occupation is bona fide and that in the nature of business which the landlord's brother wanted to carry on, neither preparation nor it is required for the landlord to show that his brother is carrying on business in a rented premises. Being a concurrent finding, according to Mr. P. Peppin Fernando, no interference is called for in this revision.