THANHERI MUNI SANKARAIAH Vs. BOJJALA RAJA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 22 of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act against the orders passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti in C.M.A. No.3 of 2002 dated 16-7-2002 confirming the Order and decree passed by the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti in R.C.C. No.1 of 1999, dated 8-2-2002.

(2.) Petitioner is the tenant. Respondent is the Landlord. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to herein according to jural relationship. Landlord filed a petition before the learned Rent Controller in R.C.C. No.l of 1999 seeking eviction of the tenant from the premises bearing No.16-539 situated at Sreeramnagar colony, Srikalahasti town on the ground of wilful default, bona fide requirement and for effecting necessary repairs. It was the case of the landlord that the tenant committed wilful default of payment of rent from the month of January, 1999 and therefore, he is liable for eviction. It is also his case that the premises in question was bona fide required for his daughter for running computer courses centre and his daughter is a Post Graduate in Arts and also Certificate Holder in Computers and that they do not have any non-residential accommodation for running this business. Therefore, the premises was bona fide required for starting the computer centre. The last ground on which the premises was sought to be evicted was that the building is giving cracks and it requires immediate repairs, otherwise, it endangers to the inmates of the premises.

(3.) The matter was resisted by the tenant on the ground that there was no wilful default and the rent was being paid within time. It is only since the landlord sought for enhancement of the rent, which was refused and therefore, the present application is filed on frivolous grounds. With regard to the bona fide requirement, it was the case of the tenant that it is a composite lease though mulgi was leased out, a portion of the mulgi was used as tea shop and the balance is being used as a residence for the last several years right from 1969 and that the suit premises was sold by the landlord in 1988 from the original owner and the same situation continued even after the premises was leased out and the bona fide requirement is disputed. It is stated that it is only to ruse to evict the tenant from the demised premises as he failed to pay the enhanced rent.