MOSA TATA RAO Vs. KADIYALA SATYAVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Ram Gopal, Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Smt. Anjanadevi Satyanarayana, Counsel representing the 1st respondent.

(2.) THE 1st respondent, Kadiyala Satyavathi, hereinafter referred to as "landlady" filed R. C. C. No. 3/2001 on the file of Rent Controller-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada praying for eviction of the tenant/revision petitioner herein/1st respondent in the R. C. C. on the ground of wilful default and on yet another ground of personal requirement. The 2nd respondent herein who is also the 2nd respondent in the aforesaid R. C. C. is the son of the landlady who is added as a proforma party. The learned Rent Controller recorded the evidence of PW-1, RW-1 and RW-2, marked Exs. A-1 to A-9 and Exs. B 1 to B-9 and ordered eviction on both the grounds. Aggrieved by the same, the tenant preferred R. C. A. No. 1/2002 on the file of Rent control Appellate Authority-cum-Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada and the learned Judge confirmed the findings and ultimately dismissed the Appeal. Aggrieved by the same the present civil revision petition is preferred.

(3.) SRI Ram Gopal, the learned Counsel representing the Revision petitioner would submit that on the aspect of wilful default the pleading is vague and the specific months of commission of wilful default had not been clearly pleaded and PW-1 also had not deposed on this aspect clearly and in the light of the vague pleading and vague evidence both the Courts below erred in ordering eviction on the ground of wilful default. The Counsel also would explain that the landlady is a rich lady and this is a small premises where the tenant is using the same for residential and non-residential purpose and there is no bona fide requirement on the part of the landlady and on this ground also the findings recorded by both the Courts below in this regard may have to be set aside. The learned Counsel also advanced yet another argument that inasmuch as it is a composite lease, the eviction petition as such is not maintainable. The Counsel placed reliance on certain decisions in this regard.