Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2.Aggreived by the said Judgment and Decree of the Rent Control appellate authority passed in R.C.A.No.15 of 2007, dated 18.03.2008, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

3.The short facts of the case are as follows:

The respondent/landlord has filed H.R.C.O.P.No.36 of 2004 against the revision petitioner/tenant for delivery of vacant possession of the schedule mentioned property viz. A brick built building situated at No.79, Jawaharlal Nehru Street, Pondicherry-1, within the limits of Pondicherry Commune and Pondicherry municipality. The respondent is the owner and the landlord of the property, well described in the schedule of the petition. The revision petitioner is the tenant in the non-residential building and was paying a rent of Rs.900/- for every English calendar month. The respondent is running a tailoring business under the name and style of 'M/s.Vijayam Tailoring Mart' in the said non-residential building. The revision petitioner has been a tenant for the past eight years. The respondent/landlord has a married daughter named Padmavathy. Even though, she is married, she stays with the landlord due to family circumstances. The said Padmavathy is a graduate in Astrology and she has now been appointed as Branch Manager of Karthika Astrological Training Centre for Pondicherry. In spite of this, the said Padmavathy and her husband do not have sufficient income to meet their expenses. So, the landlord wants to establish a separate business namely Browsing Centre, Fax, Std etc., in the petition premises to assist her daughter.
(i) Whether the petitioner is entitled for eviction on the ground of demolition and re-construction?
(ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled for eviction on the ground of requirement for own use and occupation?
(iii)To what relief?

9.The learned Rent Controller at Puducherry has passed an order as follows:

"6.POINT NO.1:
Petition is filed for eviction on the ground of demolition and reconstruction and requirement of the premises for own use and occupation.
7. Petitioner is the landlady and respondent is the tenant on payment of Rs.900/- as rent wherein she is running a tailoring business in the name and style of M/s.Boutique Vijayan. Petitioner's daughter Mrs.Padmavathy is staying with her due to family circumstances. She is graduate in Astrology and she has now been appointed as Branch Manager of Karthika Astrological Training Centre, Dharmapuram, Erode. Petitioner's daughter requires the petition premises to establish her branch office of Karthika Astrological Centre at Pondicherry and an internet, Fax, E-mail, STD booth to augment income. The entire premises is in a dilapidated condition and requires immediate demolition. Petitioner has got sufficient money for the same. She has obtained necessary sanction from the Planning authorities. Hence this petition is filed.

PW1 contended that her daughter Mrs.Padmavathy is a graduate in astrology and that she is working as a Branch Manager of Karthika, Astrological Training Centre, Darapuram. Her husband is earning Rs.2,500/- per month. Hence it has become necessary for her daughter to establish her Branch manager office at Pondicherry of Karthika Astrological Centre and establish internet service, Fax, E-mail and STD booth for her income.

24. There is no dispute with respect to the first ingredient. With respect to the second ingredient, it is noticed that the above RCOP was filed on 4.6.2004. Petitioner has produced E.P7 which is a proceedings issued by the Karthika Astrological Training Centre, Dharapuram. Ex.P7 is dated 1.4.2005 i.e., subsequent to the filing of this RCOP. Under Ex.P7, Mrs.Padmavathy is appointed a Branch Manager of the Astrological Training Centre for one year from 1.4.2005 to 31.3.2006. The renewal was purely temporary and not on salary basis.

25. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent, petitioner has sought the premises to establish her branch manager office of Karthika Astrological Training Centre intends to start a branch office at Pondicherry. Consequently it is not known whether the training centre intends to continue the petitioner's daughter as a branch manager at Pondicherry. Petitioner has not stated that her daughter intends to start an Astrological Training Centre independently. Under such circumstances it cannot be said that the requirement of the petitioner's daughter to establish a branch Manager office cannot be construed as personal or as carrying on business.