R V N CHANDRASEKARA CHETTY Vs. KAKUMANI ADIKESAVALU CHETTYS CHARITIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions were heard together, as the question of law and of fact raised in all of them was a common one.

(2.) THE petitions arise out of the proceedings before the Rent Controller filed by the landlord in each case that be required the premises bona fide for the purpose of immediate demolition and reconstruction under Section 14 (1) (b) of the Madras buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. The tenants contended in all these petitions that the application of the landlord was not a bona fide one, that the condition of the building was good and that the landlord was making use of the provisions in the Act for getting enhanced rent. The finding of the Rent Controller as well as of the appellate authority in all these cases was that the building in question in each of the applications was very old, that the landlord had ample resources to invest in the new building proposed to be constructed after demolition and that the application was bona fide. The tenant in each of the applications has therefore come to this court in revision.

(3.) THE question that arises for consideration is whether it is necessary for the landlord to prove that the building is in a dangerous or dilapidated condition and that the immediate purpose is demolition of the building for the purpose of reconstruction. The words used in S. 14 (1) (b) of the Act are "bona fide" required for the immediate purpose of demolishing and such a demolition is to be made for the purpose of creating a new building". Now, what is the interpretation to be given for the words "bona fide required for the immediate purpose of demolishing?"