GURRAM NAGAIAH Vs. KODURU RADHAKRISHNAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Second Appeal is filed against the sole respondent, by name, Koduru Radha Krishnaiah. He died during the pendency of the Second Appeal, and his legal representatives were brought on record. He filed O.S.No.3116 of 2003 in the Court of III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, against the appellant for eviction, from the suit schedule property. He pleaded that he is the owner of the property in premises bearing No.27-43-7/B, Vijayawada, and that the appellant is his tenant. An agreement was said to have been entered into on 01-10-1998, providing for lease of the premises for three years on a monthly rent of Rs.1,500/-. According to him, there existed a clause in the agreement, requiring the appellant to hand over the possession on expiry of three years, and in spite of repeated demands, the appellant did not vacate the premises. A notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act (for short 'the T.P. Act') was said to have been issued. He also complained that the arrears of rent of the premises, ever since 01-08-2003 at the rate of Rs.4,000/-per month are due. Reference was made to O.S.No.2757 of 2002 filed by the appellant herein for injunction.

(2.) The appellant filed a written-statement, admitting the fact that he is the tenant of the premises. However, he stated that he was inducted into possession by the State Bank of Hyderabad (SBH), which took possession of the property from the respondent, on account of non-payment of loan. He pleaded that though there existed an agreement for a period of three years, the respondent orally agreed to extend the tenancy for a period of 20 years, and that the quit notice issued by him was untenable in law. The circumstances under which he filed O.S.No.2757 of 2002 were also narrated.

(3.) The trial Court dismissed the suit through judgment dated 24-01-2006 on the ground that the agreement dated 15-10-1998 marked as Ex.A-4 is not valid and binding on the parties and that the quit notice dated 27-08-2003 is contrary to law. The respondent filed A.S.No.94 of 2006 in the Court of II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada. The appeal was allowed on 02-01-2007. Hence, this Second Appeal.