Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5.Being dissatisfied with the order passed by the Learned Appellate Authority viz., VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in R.C.A.No.754 of 2008 dated 12.10.2009, the Revision Petitioner/Respondent/Tenant has preferred this Revision before this Court.

6.According to the Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner/Tenant, the order of the Learned Appellate Authority viz., VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in R.C.A.No.754 of 2008 in R.C.O.P.No.95 of 2008 is opposed to facts, weight of evidence and contrary to law and as a matter of fact, there is non application of mind and non- consideration of relevant evidence available on record. The Learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner submits that the property has been leased out to the Petitioner measuring an extent of 600 square feet in the ground floor and that the Respondent/Landlord has purchased only 328 square feet, as per Ex.P.9 Sale Deed dated 16.02.006 and the Respondent/Land Lord with an ulterior motive has made a fraudulent misrepresentation before the Learned Rent Controller as well as the Learned Appellate Authority falsely claiming to be the owner of entire 600 square feet and instituted the proceedings for owner's occupation under The Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act, 1960.