Ramachandran Nair, J.

1. The tenant of a building, who is ordered to be evicted from the premises for the bona fide need of the landlord, is the petitioner herein.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner Shri B.N. Shiv Shanker submitted that so many factors have relevance to show absence of any bona fide need herein which have not been properly appreciated by the Appellate Authority. At the outset, it is pointed out that the Rent Control Court had rejected the prayer under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (for short, the 'Act'). The case was tried along with R.C.P.No.90/2010 and the Appellate Authority reversed the finding.

3. We have been taken in extenso through the pleadings, the notices issued by the landlord and the evidence in the matter. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, Ext.A6 notice was issued on 24/11/2007 wherein initially, the landlord had set up a plea on bona fide need. It is stated by the landlord in the present eviction petition that the tenant had sought for time to vacate the premises and therefore, he did not approach the Court. The present proceedings have been initiated after Ext.A8 notice date