The respondent in R.C.O.P. No.70 of 1992 on the file of the Court of Small Causes, Madras, is the revision petitioner.

.2. The landlady sought eviction of the revision petitioner on two grounds viz., (1) default in payment of rent. It is said that rent for the months of July, 1991 to December, 1991 were defaulted; (2) The building is required bona fide for her own occupation. It is stated that the landlady and her family members are now living in New Delhi and they want to settle at Madras andthe building in question is the only building owned by her at Madras and the landlady and her family members need the building for their own occupation.

3. In the counter statement, both these allegations are denied. The revision petitioner submitted that it had not committed any default, much less wilful default. It has also contended that the present claim is not in good faith and the intention of the landlady is to let out the building for a higher rent.

4. Both the authorities below found against the tenant on both the grounds and both the

Authorities ordered eviction. The tenant was directed to surrender possession.

The concurrent finding of the Authorities below is challeng