Premchand Motichand Sha vs T.K. Hameed Sultan

Balakrishna Ayyar, J.—The tenant is the petitioner He is living in a portion of 2/121. Andiappa Naicken Street. The landlord is using the rest of the premises partly as a residence for the members of his family and partly for the purposes of a business he is carrying on. On the ground that he wanted additional accommodation both for purposes of residence and for purposes of his business he sought to evict the petitioner. The House Rent Controller dismissed the application. On appeal that order was set aside. The tenant has now come to this Court in revision. The principal argument of the learned Counsel for the petitioner was this. In para 6 of his petition the landlord stated that his intention was to use certain portions" of the premises for business purpose and certain other portions for residential purpose. The evidence given shows that his intention is to invert the portion which the petitioner is using as his residence for non residential purposes. This he cannot do and he cannot get an order of eviction for this purpose.

Now it is no doubt true that Cl. (a) of the R. 3 of S. 7 of the Madras Act XXV of 1949 proceeded on the basis that, in the case of a residential building the landlord cannot obtain eviction unless he wants to reside in it himself. Similarly in the case of a non residential building a landlord cannot obtain eviction for his own use unless he wants it for purposes of his business. But Cl. (c) which applies to portions of buildings does not appear to contain any such limitation. If a landlord occupies only a portion of a building and uses part of that portion as his residence and the rest for business purposes and he wants further accommodation in the same building and on that ground seeks to evict a tenant, the tenant cannot insist that the landlord should continue to use as a residence that part which he himself was using as a residence If the landlord can satisfy the condition that he wants further accommodation in the same building and obtains an order of eviction it would be open to him to readjust the additional accommodation that he has obtained in the manner he considers most convenient to himself.

The civil revision petition is dismissed with costs. Time to vacate three months.