- (1.) The landlord filed a petition under section 10(3)(a)(i) of The Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act, 1960, (hereinafter will be referred to as " The Act"), seeking an order of eviction against the tenant/respondent on the ground that the leased tenement is required for his own use and occupation. The said petition was allowed, granting two months time, for the tenant, to vacate. The tenant filed an appeal in RCA No. 226 of 2012 and the Rent Control Appellate Authority confirmed the order of eviction passed by the Tribunal below. Challenging the concurrent dismissal of the defence of the tenant, the tenant has filed this Civil Revision Petition. Brief facts of the case is as follows- The suit property is a shop bearing Door No. 6 measuring an extent of 30 sq.ft (5x6) being used for the commercial purpose of tailoring. The father of the respondent and thereafter, the respondent, are tenants under the petitioner right from the year 1977. The petitioner's son and grandson are unemployed and therefore, Shop No. 6 is required for the purpose of running xerox business. On this ground of own use and occupation, the petition was filed.
(2.) The claim made for personal use and occupation was disputed by the tenant on the following grounds - (a) The respondent owns eight shops which are adjacent to the petition mentioned property and the claim of the petitioner against this respondent alone is motivated. (b) The tailoring business is the only livelihood option available to the tenant and therefore, vacating the premises would amount to vacating his business. (c) The requirement of the petitioner is not bona fide.
(3.) The Rent Controller, on framing points for consideration, gave a finding that the petitioner's son and grandson remained unemployed and as the petitioner's son and grandson are not owners of any other non-residential building in the city of Chennai, the landlord is entitled to get the tenant vacated. There is a further finding that the requirement of the landlord is bona fide.;