ORDER: The civil revision petition has to be allowed on a short ground. The Rent Control Appellate Authority has remanded the matter to the Rent Controller on the question of wilful default. This Court in series of decisions in: (1) Rangaswami Naidu v. The Second Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, (1949)1 M.L.J. (S.N.) 24; (2) Kuttappa Nair v. Shahul Hameed, (1973)2 M.L.J. 55 and (3) P.Narasimha Chetty (died) v. Narayana Chetty, (1983)1 M.L.J. (N.R.C..) 1: 1982 T.N.L.J. 462, has held that the Rent Control Appellate Authority has no such power of remand. Following the said decisions I hold that the Rent Control Appellate Authority was not correct in remanding the matter to the Rent Controller. 2. Mr.K.Kannan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the Rent Control Appellate Authority has remanded the matter because the petitioner herein sought to introduce certain documents, which the respondent stoutly opposed. I am of the view that when the petitioner has produced certain documents, the appellate authority should have either considered the documents or called for findings from the Rent Controller on the documents and hence for that purpose the power of remand cannot be exercised. 3. It is also seen that the Rent Control Appellate Authority has accepted the reasonings and confirmed the two findings of the Rent Controller on the question of requirement of the premises by the landlords is for his own use and occupation and on the question of causing damage to the buildings, but the appellate Controller has confirmed the same without giving any independent reasonings. Accordingly, the findings of the Rent Control Appellate Authority on all the issues are set aside. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is allowed. The result, is, the matter is remitted back to the Rent Control Appellate Authority to decide the matter afresh and in accordance with law. No costs.