( 1 ) THE question that arises for determination in this Civil Revision Petition is as to the true construction of section 7 clause (3) (a) (iii) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act of 1949. The petitioner is the landlord and the respondent is the tenant. The petitioner applied for an order directing the tenant to put him in possession of a non-residential building. The Rent controller, Nandyal, ordered eviction of the tenant holding that the application was a bonafide one and that he had no other building in Nandyal municipality to carry on the business in respect of which he applied for a licence. But, on appeal, the House Rent Control Appellate Authority while agreeing that the application was bonafide, held that the terms of Sec. 7 (3) (a) (iii) were not complied with as he was not carrying on any retail business before the date of the application and consequently allowed the appeal, and his order was confirmed by the District Judge of Kurnool in revision. The landlord has consequently preferred the Civil Revision Petition to this Court. Section 7 (3) (a) provides when a landlord may apply to the Controller for an order directing the tenant to