(1) THIS appeal by the landlord has been referred to a three-Judge bench for decision in order to resolve the apparent conflict between D. Devaji v. K. Sudarashana Rao on the one hand and J. Panda v. R. Narsubai and Saroj Kumar Das (Dr) v. Arjun Prasad Jogani on the other. The need to resolve the conflict arises because of the interpretation put to Section 10(3(a)(iii) of the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960. The provisions reads as follows:

10.EVICTION of Tenants- (l)-(2 * *

(3(A) A landlord may subject to the provisions of clause (d), apply to the Controller for an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building-

(I)-(II) * * *

(III) in case it is any other non-residential building, if the landlord is not occupying a non-residential building in the city, town or village concerned which is his own or to the possession of which he is entitled whether under this Act or otherwise-

(A) for the purpose of a business which he is carrying on, on the date of the application; or

(B) for the purpose of a business which in the opinion of the Controller, the landlord bona fide proposes to commence: