Respondents 2 and 3 in R.C.O.P. No.3 of 1990, on the file of Rent Controller (District Munsif), Pollachi, are revision petitioners.

.2. One V.Balasubramnaiam, father of respondents 1 to 6 herein, filed the said eviction petition under Sec.10(3)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, on the following allegations: The landlords are owning a mill for deshelling groundnut. It is their family business. The existing place is quite insufficient for their business and, therefore, the landlord has to construct godowns and also I drying yards petition mentioned premises alone is I suitable place for locating the same, since it lies just adjacent to the petitioner’s business place. Hence, the landlords require the petition mentioned building as additional accommodation for their business. They have to demolish and reconstruct the petitioned premises to make it suitable as additional accommodation for their business. It is further said that originally the landlord planned to construct residential accommodation in the petition mentioned premises. But, since the extension of business is mote important, he was very much in need of the premises as additional accomm