JUDGMENT

Sethi, J.-The appellant-landlord prayed for eviction of the respondents-tenants on the ground of his bonafide personal requirement within the meaning of Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").  He submitted that he had a large family and was residing in a rented premises. He intended to convert the entire premises, in the occupation of the respondents-tenants and some other tenants, into one portion by making suitable alterations. It was further contended that the respondents were in arrears of payment of rent.

2. The Trial Court allowed the petition holding that the appellant required the premises for his bonafide use and occupation but in revision filed by the respondents-tenants, the order of the Trial Court was set aside vide the common order impugned in these appeals. The appellant submits that the High Court was not justified in allowing the revision petitions and setting aside the order passed by the Trial Court allegedly without looking into the fact that the entire premises in question was to be made as one unit as per plan Exhibit P-8. It is further contended that the High Court was not justified in holdin