BODDU NARAYANAMMA Vs. VENKATARAMA ALUMINIUM CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, by special leave, is from the judgment and order of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Civil Revision Petition No. 134 of 1996 passed on July 29, 1997. It raises a question of interest, namely, whether a petition by a landlord seeking eviction of a tenant under Section 10(3)(a)(i)(b) of the A. P. Act from the demised building, let out under a composite lease for residential as well as non-residential purposes, is maintainable

(2.) The appellant is the landlady and the respondents are tenants of premises bearing D. Nos. 19/76-A and 19/76A-1; Innespeta, Rajahmundry (hereinafter referred to as "the demised building") which comprises of a residential and a non-residential portion. She and her husband filed eviction petition, R.C.C. No. 71 of 1981, on the file of the Principal District Munsif-cum-Rent Controller, Rajamundry, under Section 10(3)(a)(i)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (which is referred to in this judgment as 'the A. P. Act') against the respondents (the first respondent is the partnership firm and respondents 2 to 5 are its partners) seeking their eviction from the demised building on the ground of bona fide requirement for the personal residence of their family. The respondents resisted the petition, briefly stated, on two grounds; (i) the lease granted in their favour is a composite lease and as such the petition for their eviction is not maintainable, and (ii) the requirement of the appellant is not bona fide.

(3.) The learned Rent Controller recorded the findings that the requirement of the appellant is not bona fide and that the eviction petition is not maintainable; in that view of the matter, he dismissed the eviction petition. The husband of the appellant died in the meanwhile. The appellant then filed an appeal, R.C.A. No. 11/1994, before the learned Subordinate Judge, Rajamundry, the Appellate Authority under the A. P. Act. By its order dated 27-11-1995, the Appellate Authority held that the requirement of the appellant was bona fide and the eviction petition was maintainable. Accordingly, the Appellate Authority set aside the order of the Rent Controller and allowed the appeal. The respondents carried the matter in Civil Revision Petition before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. While confirming the finding that the requirement of the appellant was bona fide, the High Court on the question of maintainability, set aside the order of the Appellate Authority holding that the eviction petition was not maintainable. The revision petition was thus allowed on 29-7-97. It is against that order of the High Court, the appellant is in appeal before this Court.