1997 INSC 0148
                                                  P. Sriramamurthy

                                                           Vs

                                               Vasantha Raman (Mrs)

                                          Civil Appeal No. 3153 of 1995

                                     (S. Saghir Ahmed, K. Ramaswamy JJ)

                                                      07.02.1997

                                                        ORDER

1. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Madras High Court, made on 6-1-
1995 in CRP No. 404 of 1993.

2. The appellant is the tenant and the respondent is the landlady. Admittedly, a lease for 11 months
was executed on 18-2-1988 at a rent in a sum of Rs. 2800 per month. Notice was given on 13-6-
1988 on the ground that the appellant had committed wilful default in the payment of the rent for
three months. Reply thereto was given on 20-6-1988 denying the allegations. By the time, the
petition came to be filed by the respondent, the default came to be for six months. As a
consequence, OA No. 2709 of 1988 was filed for eviction of the respondent under Sections 10(2)(i)
and 10(ii)(b) of Tamil Nadu Building Lease and Rent Control Act, 1960. The Rent Controller
ordered eviction on the ground of wilful default and also for using the premises for purpose other
than for which it was let out. On appeal, it was reversed. But in the revision, the High Court held
that the appellant has committed wilful default in the payment of the rent. Thus, it confirmed the
order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller.

3. The question is whether the appellant has committed wilful default of payment ? In the counter-
affidavit filed in this Court, it is specifically stated that a lease for 11 months was granted with an
intention that after the retirement of the respondent's husband they could come back from the United
States of America and settle down permanently in Madras in the demised premises. It is also stated
in para 12 of the counter-affidavit that the wife and the husband sustained injuries in a car accident
and due to severe back pain, particularly during the winter season, they had decided to come back.
In fact, her husband retired from service on 15-4-1995. When the respondent's husband retired from
service, they decided to permanently come back and settle down in Madras. Thus it is obvious that
they needed their house for personal occupation. It is true that the need for personal occupation was
not pleaded. It is settled law that for moulding the relief, subsequent events can be taken note of.
Under those circumstances, the relief of eviction could be granted on the ground of personal
occupation. The amount of Rs. 24,000 deposited by the appellant shall be adjusted towards the
arrears of the rent. If there is any arrears to be paid, time is given to the appellant to pay the same.
Six months time from today is granted to the appellant to deliver the vacant possession of the
premises on filing usual undertaking within a period of four weeks from today. The respondent is
also directed to file an affidavit within a period of six weeks from today that after their coming back
from the States, they shall neither let out the building to the third party nor induct any party and
shall personally stay in the building and shall not leave back for the United States of America within
a period of ten years from today. In the event of their leaving for the United States within the said
period, the tenant would be at liberty to seek possession of the premises.
4. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.