In my view, the learned Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes was perfectly justified in allowing this appeal by the tenant against the order of eviction, and, there is no case whatever for entertaining a revision, upon the application of the landlord, from that judgment. The question of the bona fide requirement of a landlord of rented premises, for immediate demolition and reconstruction, under section 14 (1) (b) of the Act, is sometime difficult to adjudge. Each case has to be judged upon the totality of its facts, and it may be impossible to lay down any hard and fast rule. The matter was considered by me, in certain of its aspects, in Mehsin Bhai v. Hale &38; Co., Madras1. It has also been considered by Kailasam, J., in Ramachandran v. Kazim Khaleeli2and reference was made to my decision in the judgment of the learned Judge. The two decisions are, in my view, perfectly in harmony with each other, and there is no conflict. No rigid rule can be formulated with regard to the age of the building, and, it is certainly not necessary that the building should be of a particular age, to justify the requirement for demolition. But, needless to say, it is commonsense to presum