1. A landlord who sought eviction of his tenant from a portion of a building in which he himself was residing lost before the Rent Control Court, the Appellate Authority and the Revisional Court and he has challenged those orders in this revision. Of course an order for eviction was granted to him on the ground of arrears of rent but that was liable to be defeated by deposit. The courts have failed to determine properly under what provision of law the application for eviction had to be considered. In the petition filed by the petitioner he has referred to the petition as one filed under S.11. There are many sub-sections in S.11 each one of which indicates relief to be granted under different circumstances. A claim for eviction under S.11(3) and one under S.11(8) have quite often been wrongly identified in cases that come up before the courts. When a person seeks eviction for the purpose of occupation for himself or for any other member dependent on him the claim falls under S.11(3). When he seeks eviction so as to have additional accommodation for his existing residence then the claim falls under S.11(8). He may seek such additional accommodation because the existing ac