1. The tenant against whom an order of eviction was passed in the trial court and which was confirmed before the lower appellate court in R.C.A. 29 of 1991, has come forward with this revision petition.

2. Short facts are:— The respondent/landlord has filed the petition for eviction on the ground of requirement for non-residential purposes and on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent. That was opposed by the tenant/revision petitioner herein. In the additional counter, a plea is raised that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. On that, the trial court had taken up that contention also into consideration and had framed a point whether the denial of the petitioners claim is bona fide or not. The trial court had held that there was wilful default in payment of arrears of rent and there was denial of title which was not bona fide, but rejected the petitioners claim of requirement for own use and for non-residential purposes. On appeal by the tenant, the appellate authority had held that there was wilful default in payment of rent, on a finding that there was arrears of rent for the period from May 1988 to July, 1988 and it was wilful