Having failed before both the authorities below under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) the tenants have preferred this civil revision petition against the concurrent eviction order passed against them on the ground of wilful default in payment of arrears of rent for a period of six months from 11. 1984 to 30.4.1985, in a sum of Rs.4,200 in all, that is at the rate of Rs.700 per month.

2. The only argument made by learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have given rental advance of Rs.7,000 to the respondent-landlady and if that is taken into account, there is no default at all. The receipt issued by the respondent- landlady for the abovesaid sum of Rs.7,000 is said to be with the Income Tax Recovery Office, Coimbatore-18 and in this connection, the petitioners have also filed in this C.R.P. C.M.P. No. 15892 of 1996 to summon the advance receipt from the said tax recovery office, so that they could prove the said advance. Further, in this regard the said learned counsel relied on K.Narasimha Rao v. T.M. Nasimuddin Ahmed, (1996)2 L.W. 169, which has held that where the landlord has tenant’