The appellant companytested the petition denying the pleas of wilful default in payment of rent as well as of personal requirement of the landlord.
Against that order both the appellant and the respondents filed Revisions before the High Court CRP No.1582 of 1993 was filed by the appellant and CRP No.1705 of 1993 was filed by the respondents.
From the date of service of the prohibitory order the appellant stopped payment of monthly rent to the respondents.
Aggrieved thereby, the respondents filed R.C.A.No.43 of 1991 before the Appellate Authority, Tirunelveli.
On the ground that the appellant had companymitted wilful default in payment of rent for the periods A March 6, 1979 to February 24, 1988 and B February 24, 1988 to February 15, 1990 and on the ground that he required the premises for his own use and occupation, the said Shahul Hameed landlord filed R.C.O.P.No.2 of 1990 for eviction of the appellant tenant before the Rent Controller District Munsiff Court Valliyur under Sections 10 2 i and 10 3 a iii of the Tamil Nadu Buildings Lease and Rent Control Act, 1960 for short the Act on August 17, 1990.
In appeal, it was held that the ground of bona fide requirement of the respondents landlords was number proved however, the ground of wilful default in payment of rent was found against the appellant tenant and accordingly eviction of the appellant was ordered on April 12, 1993.
The learned Rent Controller dismissed that petition on April 30, 1991.
In their C.R.P. the respondents filed CMP No.13064 of 1996 seeking permission to amend the grounds of revision and to raise the additional ground under Section 10 3 c of the Act for additional accommodation.
But on receiving the numberice on January 18, 1988, he paid rent for the entire period to the Tax Recovery Officer.
On March 6, 1979, the appellant was served with a prohibitory order by the Tax Recovery Officer, Income Tax Department, Tirunelveli, which was followed by another order issued by the same authority under Section 226 3 of the Income Tax Act on January 18, 1988.
The appellant took the premises on monthly rent of Rs.60/ from one Shahul Hameed, predecessor in interest of the respondents, in 1974.
The appellant is the tenant and the respondents are the landlords of the cycle shop bearing No.70, Main Road, Eruvadi hereinafter referred to as the premises .
SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI,J. This appeal arises from the companymon order of the High Court of Madras in CRP Nos.1582, 1705/93 and CMP No.13064/96 in CRP No.1705/93 passed on March 27, 1997.
The petition was opposed by the appellant.
