T SRIRAMULU Vs. DIWAN EKNATHRAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision filed by the tenant arises under the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act 1960, for short "The Act".

(2.) We will refer to the parties in this Judgment as original landlord, landlord and tenant for convenience sake.

(3.) Eviction petition was instituted by the original landlord (father of the landlord) on the ground that the schedule premises is required bona fide for the business of his son (landlord) to commence cloth business. It is stated in the application for eviction that the original landlord is the kartha of Hindu Undivided Family, consisting of himself and two sons (including landlord). The joint family possesses property including the petition schedule shop. His son Diwan Vijaykumar, aged about 22 years (landlord) is carrying on business under the name and style of "Vijaya bangle Store" in a rented mulgi bearing Municipal No.1-1-258/3 belonging to Sn U.Narayana, situate at Chik- kadapalli, Hyderabad. He is pressing the original landlord to provide him petition schedule mulgi belonging to the joint family to commence cloth business on the ground that his bangle business is not profitable and suitable which is being run in a rented premises at Chikkadapalli and therefore, the petition schedule premises is required bonafide for his son (Landlord) to commence cloth business. They also stated that not only himself but also his son has necessary capacity to invest in the cloth business and to commence the same in the petition schedule premises and that the bona fide need of the son (landlord) is also the bona fide need of the original landlord. Original landlord filed the application as Kartha of Hindu Undivided Family in a representative capacity.