P RAMACHANDRA REDDY Vs. C DESAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant filed this C.R.P. against the order of the Prl. Subordinate Judge-cum- Rent Control Appellate Tribunal, Tirupathi dt. 22-11-1997 made in CM.A.No. 2 of 1996 confirming the order of the Rent Controller, Tirupathi in R.C.C.No. 22 of 1990, dated 29-12-1995.

(2.) The respondent who is the landlady filed eviction petition before the Rent Controller, Tirupathi which was initially numbered as R.C.C.No. 5 of 1981 and it was transferred to Rent Controller, Pakala and numbered as RC.C. No. 2 of 1988 and again it was re-transferred to the file of Rent Controller, Tirupathi and renumbered as R.C.C.No. 22 of 1990. The parties hereinafter are referred to as arrayed in the R.C.C.No. 22 of 1990 before the Rent Controller. The petitioner herein is referred to as the 'tenant' and the respondent herein is referred to as 'landlady'. The landlady filed the petition under Section 10 (3) (a) (i) (a) and 10 (2) (i) and (vi) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for a direction to the tenant to vacate from the 'B' schedule building and hand over the vacant possession to her. The case of the landlady is that she purchased the petition schedule property under a registered sale deed dt. 18-8-1980 (Ex. A-1) from her vendor K. Srinivasulu Reddy and when the building was purchased, in a portion of it K. Srinivasulu Reddy was residing and in another portion the tenant P. Ramachandra Reddy was residing and the vendor vacated it and handed over to the landlady and also delivered constructive possession of the building under occupation of the tenant and also directed the tenant to pay the rents to the landlady. The landlady submits that she is the absolute owner of the entire petition schedule property and the tenant occupied 'B' schedule property which is part and parcel of 'A' schedule property and the monthly rent for 'B' schedule property was Rs. 100/- which was payable by the tenant on or before 5th day of every succeeding month and the landlady was residing in a rented small house in lsuka street, Tirupathi along with her son who was studying B.A. in S.V. Arts College at Tirupathi and the house occupied by her was not sufficient and convenient for their living and the landlord of the landlady was pressurizing her to vacate the house in which she was residing and therefore she has issued a registered notice on 21-10-1980 vide Ex. A-5 demanding the tenant to vacate and deliver the vacant possession of the 'B' schedule building to her, but the tenant did not vacate. On the other hand, the tenant gave a reply denying the averments made in the notice by the landlady and the tenant neither paid the rents nor did he vacate the house and the landlady filed the petition for eviction of the tenant for committing wilful default in payment of the rents and for personal occupation of 'B' schedule building.

(3.) The tenant filed counter denying the allegations made in the petition and further stated that the landlady is not the owner of the petition schedule property, but one Samanu Avanakshamma was the owner of the said property and he is the tenant under the said Avanakshamma since 15 years and there is no privity of contract at any time between the landlady and the tenant and there is no relationship between them as landlady and tenant, therefore the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. It is further stated that the landlady is not entitled for any relief in the said petition as the tenant is not due and payable any amounts to the landlady. The tenant also stated that when the landlady failed in her attempts to trespass into the property in which the tenant is residing, Avanakshamma filed O.S.No. 545 of 1980 in the Court of Prl. District Munsif at Tirupathi and the Court granted temporary injunction in I.A.NO. 1788 of 1980 on 27-9-1980 and thus the tenant submitted that the landlady approached the Court with frivolous and vexatious petition with an intention to cause annoyance and hardship to the tenant from continuing to live peacefully in the said building and the landlady somehow wanted to evict him. It is also stated that for wrongful conduct of the landlady a Crl.M.P.No. 640 of 1981 was also filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate of II Class at Tirupathi.