I am fully convinced that the learned Second Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, had every justification for allowing the appeal by the tenant with regard to the building which was owned by the landlord (Revision Petitioner), and in respect of which the landlord had obtained an order of eviction in the first Court upon the basis of section 14 (3) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act XVIII of 1960, namely,

“that the building is bona fide required by the landlord for the immediate purpose of demolishing it and such demolition is to be made for the purpose of erecting a new building on the site of the building sought to be demolished.”

The learned Judge refers to the oral evidence, and points out that this building has been in existence for sometime, and that, according to qualified expert (R.W. 2), it could be maintained intact without any danger of falling, for another twenty years. It may be that the building was erected a considerable time previously ; but, nevertheless, its present condition may be such as to involve no danger whatever of any breaking up, so as to necessitate a decision by the landlord that it was in his interest to demolish it immediately,