1. Tenant in R.C.O.P. No. 51 of 1986, on the file of the Rent Controller (District Munsifs Court), Vellore, is the revision petitioner. After revision was filed, landlord (respondent) died, and his legal representative has been impleaded as additional respondent.

2. Landlord sought eviction of the petitioner herein on the ground that the demised premises is required by him bona fide for his own occupation. It is a non-residential building. Landlord wanted the same for his own use, namely, for conducting a hotel business. It has come out in evidence that the landlord is running hotel business, and his son (second respondent herein) is also associated in the business.

3. Both the Authorities below held that the claim of the landlord is bona fide and ordered eviction. They were satisfied that the claim by the landlord was not a pretext for eviction.

4. In Revision, learned counsel for the revision petitioner would urge that after the death of the landlord, it cannot be said that the cause of action survives and, therefore, according to him, eviction ordered by the Authorities below cannot stand. According to the learned counsel, when the landlord says that he wants to start