1. The revision petitioners are the tenants occupying Shop Nos.6 and 7 belonging to the respondent. The respondent is a Doctor and he filed R.C.O.P.Nos.246 and 247 of 2009 against the revision petitioners on the ground of additional accommodation stating that he is a Cardiologist and his wife is a Gynecologist and they want to open the Clinic in their own premises and for that purpose the two shops are required and by removing the wall in between the two shops they will get 200 Sq.ft., and they can run a Clinic in that area. The revision petitioners / tenants contested the applications stating that there is no bona fide on the part of the land lord/ respondent and the land lord has not proved that he is practising as a Doctor and the application was filed only with mala fide intention to evict them from the premises. The Rent Controller held that the petition filed under Section 10(3)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act for additional accommodation is not maintainable and the land lord has proved that they required the premises for their own occupation and ordered eviction under Section 10(3) (a)(iii) of the Act and the revision petitioners filed