Soumen Sen, C. J.

The concurrent findings of facts with regard to the bonafide need of the landlord under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control Act, 1965), (‘the Act’ for short) is challenged in this Revision Petition.

2. The Revisional Court exercises much more limited jurisdiction than a court of appeal, and it is within the confines of such limitation, that the revisional court has to exercise its jurisdiction. The scope of the revision is therefore, required to be looked into.

3. The respondent herein is the landlord of the building in question. The respondent-landlord filed an eviction proceeding under Section 11(2)(b) and 11(3) of the Act. Before the trial court the landlord failed to establish the ground under Section 11(2), however, was able to establish the bonafide need under Section 11(3) of the said Act. This order was challenged before the Appellate Court.

4. The Appellate Court considered the pleadings and the evidence, both oral and documentary, and returned a finding that the Rent Control Court was justified in allowing eviction on the ground of bonafide requirement.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner/tenant has submitted that the A