RAICHURAMATHAM PRABHAKAR Vs. RAWATMAL DUGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two cases relating to two premises, both being part of the same building, owned by the same owners but held on tenancy by two tenants. The two premises are described as Door Nos. 11-45-60 and 11-45-60/A situated at Thavvavari Street of Vijayawada. The tenants in the two premises were holding each at a monthly rent of Rs.250/- under the appellant-landlords. For convenience sake we would refer to the parties only as landlord and tenant.

(2.) The landlord initiated proceedings for recovery of possession over the tenancy premises alleging that the same were required bona fide by the landlord for the immediate purpose of demolishing and such demolition was to be made for the purpose of erecting new building on the site of the building sought to be demolished, a ground contemplated under Cl. (b) of sub-section (1) of S. 12 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred the Act, for short). The landlord was successful in both the proceedings and vide the order dated 21-2-1986, the Rent Controller directed the two tenants to put the landlord in possession of the tenancy premises within one month from the date of the order. The tenants preferred appeals which were dismissed on 5-2-1987. The time appointed for compliance by the tenants was extended by one month. The tenants delivered possession over their respective shops to the landlord on 5-3-1987. The landlord gave an undertaking to the effect that on completion of the work of repairs and alteration etc. in the building the same will be offered to the tenants.

(3.) The work was completed by the landlord within six months. On 3-9-1987, the landlord sent an offer to each of the two tenants to occupy the rebuilt premises subject to payment of Rs. 2400/- p.m.by each of the two tenants. The area of the two shops in question before renovation was 27 ft. x 11 ft. = 297 sft. each. It appears that the building continues to be non-residential as before but it has undergone structural alterations of far-reaching character. It is clear from the description of premises contained in the offer in writing made by the landlord on 3-9-1987, relevant parts whereof read as under :-