SJID QURESHI Vs. M. NARSING RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition under Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short, 'the Act') is filed by the petitioner-tenant challenging judgment dated 10-09-2015 in R.A.No. 71 of 2013 on the file of the Court of Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad (for short, 'the Appellate Court'), whereby the Appellate Court set aside order dated 20-03-2013 in R.C.No. 274 of 2011 on the file of the Court of I Additional Rent Controller, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad (for short, 'the Rent Controller'), ordering his eviction from schedule property.

(2.) The petitioner is tenant and the respondent is landlord and they will hereinafter be referred to as tenant and landlord for convenience.

(3.) The landlord filed R.C. No. 274 of 2011 on the file of the Rent Controller against the tenant for his eviction from schedule property bearing No. 11-1-119 of New Agapura, Hyderabad, under Section 10 (2) (i) and 10 (3) (iii) (b) of the Act alleging that he let out the schedule residential premises on monthly rent @ Rs. 2,665/- and obtained rental deed from the tenant on 01-03-2007 for a period of eleven months. As per the terms of lease deed, the tenant deposited two months' rent as advance and the lease period was expired by February, 2008. Though the lease period was expired, the tenant did not vacate and deliver vacant possession of the premises to the landlord despite his request to vacate the same. The landlord sought for eviction of the tenant on the ground that the premises is required for occupation of his son for his residence who is recently married and to set up practice in the mulgi attached to the house. Therefore, he required the premises for bona fide occupation of his son for residential purpose and to run a dispensary in the mulgi, which is not the subject matter of the schedule premises, along with the landlord. The landlord also claimed eviction of the tenant on the ground that the tenant committed willful default in payment of rent from May, 2010, till the date of filing the petition before the Rent Controller. When the landlord demanded the tenant for payment of arrears of rent, the latter gave an undertaking that he would vacate the premises by 31-03-2011 after paying entire dues but he did not vacate the residential premises and pay the arrears of rent. Thereupon, the landlord got issued legal notice dated 15-04-2011 calling upon the tenant to vacate the premises but the tenant did not comply with the legitimate demand made by the landlord. Therefore, the landlord filed petition for eviction of the tenant on the two grounds referred supra.