ABDULLAH Vs. JAIKVPESHAWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Tenants are the petitioners in this revision petition, which is directed against the order, dated 15th September 1993, in E.A.No. 3 of 1989 in E.P.No. 39 of 1988 in O.S.No. 48 of 1989 passed by the learned III Addtional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. By that order, the learned Judge refused to stay the execution of the decree, dated 19-8-1985 in Original Suit No. 1088 of 1983 obtained by the landlord/respondent herein, whereunder the Court ordered eviction of the petitioners herein from the suit schedule premises.

(2.) Petitioners herein have unsuccessfully carried the matter upto the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court also confirmed the decree, dated 19-8-1985 passed in O.S.No. 1088 of 1983 ordering eviction of the petitioners herein from the schedule premises. In execution of the said decree, the respondent landlord filed E.P.No. 39 of 1988 in the lower court. Petitioners- tenants filed E.A No. 3 of 1989 under Order 21, Rule 29 read with section 151 CPC, contending that the decree dated 19-8-1985, in O.S.No. 1088 of 1983 obtained by the respondent-landlord is null and void and not executable as the Court which passed that decree had no jurisdiction to pass the decree.

(3.) It is the contention of the petitioners-tenants that the suit, O.S.No. 1088 of 1983 was erroneously entertained and decree passed by the lower court, thinking that G.O.Ms.No. 636 General Administration (Accommodation-A) Department, dated 29-12-1983, granting exemption to certain buildings from the provisions of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act 1960 (for short 'the Act') has retrospective effect. In otherwords, petitioners contend that the decree passed in O.S.No. 1088 of 1983 is a nullity from its very inception as the Court which passed the decree in O.S.No. 1088 of 1983 had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter and the Rent Control Court alone has got the jurisdiction. It is also the case of the petitioners that the decree in O.S.No. 1088 of 1983, being a nullity from its very inception, the objection regarding the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the suit O.S.No. 1088 of 1983 can be taken even at the stage of execution of the said decree, and the bar of res judicata will not be attracted.