SUSHEELA PARTANI Vs. MUKUND DAS PARTANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri Ravindra Viswanath, the learned Counsel representing the respondent.

(2.) The respondent herein - the landlord filed the eviction petition R.C. No.251/96 on the file of IV Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad praying for eviction against the revision petitioner - the respondent in the R.C. - the tenant on the ground of wilful default. The learned Rent Controller on appreciation of the evidence of R.W.1 to R.W.3, Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.3 and Ex.B.l to Ex.B.53 came to the conclusion that the ground of wilful default had been established and ordered eviction. Aggrieved by the same, the tenant carried the matter by way of appeal R.A.No.27/2000 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad - the Appellate Authority and the learned Appellate Authority on appreciation of the evidence available on record and the findings recorde by learned Rent Controller, confirmed the findings and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the present C.R.P. is preferred under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act 1960 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience). The parties hereinafter would be referred to as landlord and tenant.

(3.) The learned Counsel representing the tenant Sri M. V. Bharati made the following submissions: