1. This revisionis directed against the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam, in R.C.A.No. 19 of 1993 confirming the judgment of the learned Rent Controller, Thiruvarur, in R.C.O.P.No. 14 of 1992. The landlord/petitioner in the R.C.O.P. is the revision petitioner.

2. Inthe petition filed by the landlord, it is contend that the respondent is the tenant in the residential building. The tenancy was the first of every English calendar month and the same was oral. The monthly rent was only Rs. 80 and the respondent was not regular in payment of rent and he was a chronic defaulter. He has also not paid rent from June, 1989 and had committed wilful default inspite of repeated demands. The conduct of the respondent shows supine indifference and callousness. When the petitioner pressed the respondent to pay the arrears of rent, he had issued a lawyers notice on 1. 1992 claiming as though there was only arrears of rent for two months. But the petitioner gave a reply and terminated his tenancy on 22. 1991 calling upon him to deliver vacant possession by 3. 1992. The respondent gave a reply contending false allegations. The allegations in the reply notice were den