The parties are referred to as per their rank in the RCOPs before the learned Rent Controller.

2. The landlady filed the above RCOPs against the tenant on the following grounds:-

(i) RCOP No.432 of 2004 - Wilful default and owner's occupation.

(ii) RCOP No.440 of 2005 - Denial of Title

(iii) RCOP No.431 of 2004 - Fixation of fair rent

2(a) According to the landlady, she is the owner of the petition premises bearing Old No.23, New No.45, Vedanthadesika Street, palathope, Chennai - 4 and the same was rented out to the tenant on a monthly rent of Rs.100/-. The tenancy is for residential purpose. The tenant has not paid the rent from October 1995 to December 2003 totalling to Rs.9,900/-. The tenant has also not paid the rent for the month of January 2004 and committed default, which is wilful default. The petition premises was required by the landlady for her own use and occupation who was residing earlier in Ambur and now settled in Chennai. The place where she was residing earlier at Ambur does not belong to her and she does not own any other building of her own either in Ambur or in Chennai other than the petition premises. The landlady requested the tenant to vacate and handover the vacant possession of the building but the tenant having promised to vacate and handover the possession, failed to keep up his promise. Hence, the landlady filed RCOP No.432 of 2004 for eviction of the tenant on the ground of wilful default and owner's occupation.

2 (b) The petition premises which was let out to the tenant was required by the landlady for her own use and occupation and also the tenant has not paid the rent and was in arrears of rent from October 1995 to December 2004. Hence, the landlady filed RCOP No.432 of 2004 against the tenant on the ground of wilful default and owner's occupation. Without care or caution and unmindful of the consequence, the tenant in defence to the application for own use and occupation and wilful default has taken the stand that his father was a tenant and thereafter he was continuing to be a tenant in respect of the land only and his father had put up the superstructure which assertion on the part of the tenant is contrary to truth and untenable too. The tenant has wilfully asserted title to the superstructure and such assertion amounts to denial of title. Hence, the landlady filed RCOP No.440 of 2005 against the tenant for eviction on the ground of denial of title.

2(c) The landlady filed RCOP No.431 of 2004 against the tenant for fixation of fair rent. According to the landlady, the petition building is situated in a very busy through fare wherein several Banks, Hospitals, Marriage Halls, Schools, Temples, Mosques, Churches and Shopping Complexes, Railway Station and High Rise Buildings are situated. The locality is a very important business area wherein even an inch of land is very costly and many buses ply. The market value of the land is Rs.50,00,000/- per ground and the guideline value is Rs.65,00,000/- per ground. The petition property is 50 yards away from the Mylapore Tank Road, commanding all civic amenities. The structure is aged about 28 to 30 years. The extent of property is 615 sq.ft. The cost of construction of the building is Rs.995/- per sq.ft. The building consists of ground floor and a portion in first floor and prayed for fixation of fair rent at Rs.9,299/- per month.

3. The tenant filed counter statements in all the RCOPs denying the averments made in the petitions.

3(a) According to him, he is a tenant in respect of the land for the past five decades since his father was living. He put up the superstructure and landlady is not the owner of building. Originally the rent was collected by Jalal Balquis Bi Saiba and the present monthly rent is Rs.100/-. Since no one came to collect the rent for the month of April 1995, he sent the same by money order but it has been returned. The rent sent for the months of May and June were returned. On 07.01.1995, the landlady sent