RATANSHI PATEL Vs. MOHAMMAD KAZIM ALI KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner - tenant filed this Civil Revision Petition against the judgment dated 13/11/1996 made in R.A.No.29/1994 on the file of the learned Additional Chief Judge: Cum: City Small Causes Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, reversing the judgment dated 12/10/1993 made in R.C.No.1007/1987 on the file of the Principal Rent Controller, Hyderabad, under Section 22 of A.P. Buildings (Rent, Lease and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) Respondents 1 to 3 herein filed R.C.No.1007/1997 against the petitioner as well as the other co-owner, who is respondent No.4 herein, under Section 10 (2) (i) of the Act praying the court to make an order directing the petitioner herein to put them in possession of the premises bearing No.8-3-322/1, situated at Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad. It is the case of the petitioner that one Aktharunnisa Begum was the owner of the said premises. During her life time, she let out the said premises to the petitioner herein on a monthly rent of Rs. 600.00 and the said Aktharunnisa Begum died on 13/10/1984. After her death, the petitioner herein did not pay the rents from November 1984 to the end of September 1987. The respondents 1,2 and 4 are the grandsons and the respondent No. 3 is the daughter-in-law of the said Aktharunnisa Begum. It is the case of respondents 1 to 3 that they are the some of the heirs of Aktharunnisa Begum and they are entitled to receive the rents and also seek eviction of the suit schedule property. As the 4th respondent did not contest the Rent Control Case, he was set exparte. The petitioner herein filed a counter before the Rent Controller stating that he had purchased the above suit premises from Smt. Aktharunnisa Begum for a consideration of Rs.1,20,000.00 vide an agreement of sale dated 27/10/1978 and she also executed another agreement dated 17/12/1981 and, therefore, the tenancy came to an end by virtue of the said agreements. It is the case of the petitioner that as he had purchased the property from Smt.Aktharunnisa Begum, the question of payment of rent by him does not arise at all to the respondents, and therefore, the Rent Control Case is not maintainable. The Rent Controller determined the following points for consideration:

(3.) On the first point, the Rent Controller held that the petitioners have not established the jural relationship between the landlord and the 1st respondent and accordingly held that the petition is liable to be dismissed. In so far as the second point is concerned, the Rent Controller held that Smt.Aktharunnisa Begum let out the open space of petition schedule property to the petitioner herein. In so far as the third point is concerned, it is held that the petitioner is using the premises for the purpose other than it was leased out. Against the said judgment of the Rent Controller, dated 12/10/1993 made in R.C.No.1097/1997, respondents 1 to 3 herein filed R.A.No.29/1994 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad.