JANI MIYAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed questioning the vires of Section 11 of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Control Act) on the ground that the provisions of the said section are violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) This is a classic illustration as to how a person in possession of valuable property in urban area, apparently does not belong to him, abuses the process of Court.

(3.) The facts of the case, in brief, giving rise to filing of this writ petition by a tenant of premises bearing Municipal No. 10-3-653/7 (H.No.272/3 RT) situated at Mallepally, Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as premises) are that one P.Hanumanth Rao, S/o P.Govind Rao purchased the premises from Andhra Pradesh Housing Board under a registered sale deed dated 9.2.1970. The said P.Hanumanth Rao executed a benami deed on 28.2.1970 where under he released all his rights and interest over the premises in favour of P.Ramanujamma, W/o P.Nagabhushan Rao. One P.V. Harinath Baba purchased the premises from P.Ramanujamma under a registered sale deed dated 13.6.1979. P.V.Harinath Baba died on 24.8.1990 leaving behind R2 to R4 herein as his legal heirs. Thus, R2 to R4 became the owners of the premises. They are no other than wife and children of P.V.Harinath Baba. R2 to R4 executed an agreement of sale-cum-General Power of Attorney in favour of K.Atchuta Rao and G. Vijay Kumar in respect of the premises on 12.4.2002. R2 to R4 represented by GPA holders viz., K.Atchutha Rao and G. Vijay Kumar filed R.C. No. 196 of 2002 against the writ petitioner alleging that he took the premises on rent from P. V. Harinath Baba on a monthly rent of Rs.800/- excluding electricity and water consumption charges and that he committed wilful default in paying the rents commencing from December, 1996. The writ petitioner filed counter resisting the eviction petition. He denied the title of R2 to R4 and set up a plea that he took the premises on lease from P.Hanumanth Rao in the year 1979 and that the said P.Hanumanth Rao died issueless and since then he has been in possession of the premises in his own capacity and thus he perfected his title over the premises by adverse possession. R2 to R4/landlords filed I.A. No.153 of 2002 under Section 11(1) of the Rent Control Act to stop further proceedings and direct the writ petitioner/ tenant to pay the outstanding arrears of rent. The learned Rent Controller allowed the application by an order dated 23.4.2003 and directed the writ petitioner/tenant to pay the outstanding arrears. The writ petitioner/ tenant filed I.A. No.348 of 2002 under Section 10 (proviso) of the Rent-Control Act to decide the issue of denial of title as a preliminary issue. The learned Rent Controller dismissed the application by an order dated 14.11.2002. The writ petitioner/ tenant filed C.R.P. No.6034 of 2002 assailing the order dated 14.11.2002 passed in I.A. No.348 of 2002. The said C.R.P. came to be dismissed with costs of Rs.5,000/-. It appears Counsel for both the parties submitted elaborate arguments and invited finding as to the jural relationship between the parties. Therefore, a finding came to be recorded in the said C.R.P. with regard to jural relationship between the parties. We deem it appropriate to refer the relevant portion in the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CRP No.6034 of 2002: