Selvaraj vs Amudhavalli on 19 April, 1999
34. No doubt, it is true that there is only a notice for enhancement of rent and there is no threat of eviction. But, it is held by this Court in Ambrose v. Abdul Rahim (1989) 1 M.L.J. 344 : (1989) 1 L. W. 357 by referring the decisions in Mohini Suraj Bhan v. Vinodkumar and Sitaramayya v. Rajasekhara Reddi (1951) 1 M.L.J. (S.N.) 40, that the landlord residing in a rental building need not prove that he was in danger of being evicted therefrom before he could get possession of his own building under the Act. If it is established that there is a genuine present need of the premises for the landlord's own occupation, the court cannot presume mala fide.