OMAR KHASIM Vs. DABBURI MADHUSUDHANA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.07.2003 passed in R.C.A.No.1 of 1998 by the Rent Control Appellate Authority cum Senior Civil judge, Vizianagaram confirming the order dated 28.10.1997 passed in R.C.C.No.3 of 1994 by the Rent Controller cum Principal District Munsif, Vizianagaram. Petitioner herein is the tenant and the respondent is the landlord in respect of the house bearing Door No.16-1-53 - 54, Municipal Assessment No.6232 in T.S.No.36 situated on the southern row of buildings to the Mahatma Gandhi Road, Vizianagaram -hereinafter referred to as the petition schedule premises. The landlord filed R.C.C.No.3 of 1994 seeking eviction of the tenant on the ground of wilful default in payment of rents under Section 10 (2) (i) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short 'thes Act') for the months March to May 1994. The said petition was allowed by order dated 28.10.1997 directing the tenant to vacate the petition schedule premises within three month from the date of the said order. Aggrieved by the same, the tenant filed R.C.A.No.l of 1998 and the appellate authority by judgment dated 23.07.2003 holding that the non-payment of rents for the months of March to May 1994 as wilful on the part of the tenant and confirming the order of the lower Court dismissed the appeal ordering eviction of the tenant. Aggrieved by the said judgment the tenant filed this revision petition under Section 22 of the Act. It is the case of the landlord in R.C.C.No.3 of 1994 that he purchased the petition schedule premises vide registered sale deed dated 26.02.1994 from one Yerra Venkata Ramana and others. The previous owners of the petition schedule premises inducted the tenant into the building on a monthly rent of Rs.575/- and the lease was oral. His vendors attorned the tenant and symbolic possession was given to him. It is stated that immediately after the purchase of the petition schedule premises, he issued a registered notice - Ex.A1 dated 25.03.1994 to the tenant informing him that he purchased the petition schedule premises and asked the tenant to pay the rent from 01.03.1993 to him only. The tenant received the said notice and sent a belated reply with false and untenable allegation under Ex.A2. It is stated that the said reply was given without any bonafides and the tenant committed default in payment of rents from March 1994 at Rs.575/- per month up to the date of filing of the petition, which was filed on 20.06.1994.

(2.) The tenant filed a counter stating that the said premises originally belonged to one Yerra Krishna Murthy and a litigation was pending between him and Yerra Krishna Murthy in R.C.C.No.33 of 1986. It is stated that he: deposited the rents up to June 1994 in the said petition and since July 1994 he has been depositing the rents in the present petition. It is farther stated that he has been regularly depositing the rents in the said RCC and there was no arrears of rent from 01.03.1994. The said counter has been filed on 13.06.1995. The only question that arises for consideration is as to whether the tenant committed wilful default in payment of rents for the months March to May 1994, as admittedly the eviction petition has been filed on 20.06.1994, the subsequent default in payment of rents is not relevant as no application has been filed under Section 11 of the Act seeking a direction to the tenant to deposit the rents so as to enable him to contest the petition.

(3.) Ex.A1 goes to show that the landlord has purchased the petition schedule premises from Yerra Narayanamma and others on 26.02.1994 and accordingly demanded the tenant to pay the rents from 01.03.1994 to him. As already stated Ex.A2 reply was given doubting the ownership on the ground that the previous landlord has not given any notice of attornment of tenamcy. The landlord, examined as P.W.I, stated he filed the eviction petition in the month of June 1994 on the ground that the tenant committed wilful default in payment of rents for the months of March to May 1994. He further stated that he did not know about the deposit of the rents by the tenant in R.C.C.No.33 of 1986 and he did not know anything about the payment of tax by the tenant. He further stated that the tenant committed wilful default in payment of rents from March to May 1994 and he did not know about the deposit of rents by the tenant by way of challans in R.C.C.No.33 of 1986.