1. Compendiously and concisely, the germane facts which are absolutely necessary for the disposal of this Civil Revision Petition would run thus:

The parties are referred to hereunder, as follows; the revision petitioner herein, M.Rajarathinam is referred to as the tenant and the respondent herein, J.Babu Shanthi is referred to as the landlady.

2. The landlady filed eviction petition in R.C.O.P.No.31 of 2003 as against the tenant invoking Sections 10(2)(1)(ii)b, 10(3)(a)(i) and 14(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, on the grounds of wilful default in paying the rent by the tenant, for owner's occupation and for demolition and reconstruction. The tenant resisted the application.

3. Up went the enquiry, during which on the landlady's side, she examined herself as P.W.1 and one Jayasekar was examined as P.W.2 and documents Exs.P1 to P17 were marked. On the side of the tenant, he examined himself as R.W.1 and documents Exs.R1 to R7 were marked. Court documents Exs.C1 to C4 were also marked.

4. Ultimately, the Lower Court rejected the ground of owner's occupation, but allowed the R.C.O.P., on the grounds of wilful default and for demolition and r