LAWS(APH)-2001-10-160

TEXTILA TRADING SYNDICATE SECUNDERABAD Vs. G LAKSHMINARAYANA

Decided On October 30, 2001
TEXTILA TRADING SYNDICATE, SECUNDERABAD Appellant
V/S
G.LAKSHMINARAYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners are the respondents 1 to 8 in RC No.50 of 1993 and respondents 4 to 9 in the CRP are respondents 2 to in the said RC No.50 of 1993 on the file of Principal Rent Controller, Secunderabad. Respondents 1 and 2 in the present CRP are petitioners 1 and 2 in RC No.50 of 1993 and 3rd respondent in RC No.50 of 1993 is no more.

(2.) For the purpose of convenience, the petitioners in the Revision Petition are referred to as "tenants" and respondents 1 and 2 are referred to as "landlords" and the A.P. Buildings (lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 will be referred to as "Act".

(3.) The landlords filed RC No.50 of 1993 on the file of Principal Rent Controller, Secunderabad on the ground of bona fide personal requirement with the following averments made in the eviction petition. The petitioners are the owners and landlords of the premises of the mulgi bearing No.2-1-77, situate at Tobacco Bazar, Secunderabad and the respondents are the tenants occupying the said premises on a monthly rent of Rs.225/-. The respondents have been using the said premises for non- residential premises. The petitioner was carrying on the business of wholesale cloth merchants along with his father, uncle and other brothers in the name and style of 'Gujjar Gopal Rao and Sons' and subsequently after his father's death in the name and style of G. Venkat Rao, and Brothers'. Thereafter the 1st petitioner discontinued his business in the suit mulgi and let out the same to the respondents. The 2nd and 3rd petitioners are the grown up sons of the 1st petitioner having finished their studies and are on the look out for starting a business of their own. They have not been able to secure any job inspite of all efforts. The petitioners 2 and 3 with the help of 1st petitioner, who has rich experience in the business of wholesale clothes, intend to commence a wholesale cloth business of their own in the suit mulgi. The petitioners are not in possession of any mulgi in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad. The petitioners require the suit mulgi for their own self occupation for the purpose of commencing a business.