Srinivasan, J.

1. The civil revision petition is directed against the concurrent orders of the Rent Controller and Appellate Authority granting the prayer of the respondent herein for eviction of the petitioner, under Section 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. The petitioner contends that the findings of the courts below are wholly unsustainable for several reasons. The first submission made by learned Counsel for the petitioner is that there is no specific averment in the petition filed by the respondent that the respondent is not in occupation of any non-residential building for the purpose of carrying on his son's business. In the absence of such an averment in the pleading, it is contended by learned Counsel that the bona fide requirement of the respondent ought not to have been accepted. I do not agree. Though there is no specific averment, it is clear from the petition that the respondent is seeking eviction of the petitioner herein on the footing that he requires the premises for the purpose of his son's business, which is being carried on in a rented premises at No. 224,Thambu Chetty Street, Madras-1. Taking into consideration