MUDIGONDA CHANDRA MOULI SASTRY Vs. BHIMANEPALLI BIKSHALU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a landlord's appeal. The landlord filed a petition for eviction of the respondent-tenant from the premises in dispute on the grounds, namely, (a) he required the said premises for his own needs; (b) the tenant has committed default in payment of rent; (c) the tenant has acquired an alternative accommodation; and (d) the premises was in a dilapidated condition which required reconstruction. The Rent Controller, after having satisfied that the grounds for eviction were well-substantiated allowed the petition filed by the landlord. Aggrieved, the tenant preferred an appeal. The appellate authority dismissed the appeal filed by the tenant. The High Court, however, in the Civil Revision Petition filed by the tenant held, that by virtue of sub-section (4)(i) of Section 10 of A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') no order of eviction can be passed against the tenant, as the tenant is in the employment in a department which has been declared as an essential service. The High Court further, after re-assessing the evidence reversed the finding of facts as regard other grounds for eviction of the tenant arrived at by the two Courts below. Consequently, the revision petition filed by the tenant was allowed and the petition filed by the landlord for eviction of the tenant was rejected.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the order of the High Court on two grounds. Firstly, that the tenant having been transferred from Tenali to Marcherla another town, the protection undre sub-section 4(i) of Section 10, was not available to the tenant and, secondly, it was not open to the High Court, while exercising its revisional jurisdiction to re-assess the evidence and arrive at a different finding contrary to the concurrent finding of facts recorded by the two Courts below.

(3.) After we heard the matter, we find that both the busmissions of learned counsel far the appellant are well-substantiated. So for as the first submission is concerned, it is worthwhile to reproduce Section 10(4)(i) of the Act, which is as under:-