M VIJAYA RAM Vs. KAMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition by the tenant against the reversing judgment by the appellate Court, arises under the following circumstances: The petitioner herein filed a petition under sub-section (5) of. section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 to permit the petitioner to deposit the monthly rents of the Mulgi bearing Municipal No. 4-1-392 situated at Abid Road, Hyderabad from November, 1974 onwards to the end of January, 1976 and also future monthly rents.

(2.) The petitioner is the tenant of the respondents in the suit Mulgi on a monthly rent of Rs. 85. Originally the suit premises was taken on lease by one Papanna, the grand father of the petitioner. The said Papanna and the father of the petitioner late M.Janakiram were running a hair cutting saloon in the premises during their lifetime. After the death of Papanna in the year 1956, the father of the petitioner was running the said business along with his son the petitioner herein and after his death, the petitioner is continuing the said business under the same name and style of "Royal Hair Cutting & Dressing Saloon" as legal representative of the deceased. The said business is being - carried on for more than 45 years. After the death of the said Papanna, Janakiram went on paying the rents, though the receipts were issued in the name of the late Papanna and after the death of the petitioner's father, the the petitioner is continuing as tenant to the knowledge of the respondents though they are issuing rent receipts in the name of Papanna & Co., after collecting rent from the petitioner. The respondents have stopped Collection of rents from November, 1974 after issuing a legal notice dated 30th November, 1974, in the name of Papanna & Sons by directing the deceased Papanna to vacate the suit premises. The petitioner as a legal representative of Papanna replied to the said notice on 27th January, 1975. In fact earlier, the respondents demanded enhancement of rent from Rs. 85 to Rs. 200 to which the petitioner did not agree. Sub-sequently from the month of November, 1974, the petitioner started sending monthly rents by Money Order till the end of November, 1975. But the respondents refused to accept ths same. As the respondents refused to receive the rent, the petitioner got a legal notice issued on 29th December, 1975, calling upon the respondents to furnish the name of the Bank in order to deposit the rent in their credit account. After the expiration of the notice period, the petitioner has sent complete rents from November, 1974 to the end of January, 1976. Since the rent amount was refused a petition under section 8 of the Act was filed on the file of the Rent Controller.

(3.) In the Counter, the respondents stated that the late Papanna and Janakiram were not carrying on business of hair cutting saloon jointly. The petitioner deliberately suppressed the dates of death of Papanna and Janakiram. There is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and therefore, they were justified in refusing to receive rents from the petitioner. The respondents bana fide required the premises for their business.