ABDUL REHMAN Vs. SARASWATHI PRASAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by order of Court of the Additional Chief Judge, city Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, in R. A. No. 168 of 1998, dated 06. 11. 2002. In exercise of appellate powers under Section 20 of Andhra Pradesh (Lease, Rent and eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereafter called, the Act), the learned Chief judge, confirmed the order of learned Principal Rent Controller, Hyderabad, dated 03. 04. 1998 in R. C. No. 436 of 1993, whereby and whereunder petitioner was directed to vacate the premises bearing mulgi No. 3-5-1145/1 situated at kachiguda 'x' Roads, Hyderabad. Though the jural relationship is denied by petitioner, for the sake of convenience, petitioner is referred to as tenant and the respondent is referred to as landlord in this order. Respondent (landlord)is resident of Alberts, Canada, and he sued for eviction of tenant through his general Power of Attorney (GPA) Sri Thakur Ratan Singh. The eviction was sought on the ground that the tenant failed to pay rents from April, 1992 and committed willful default in payment of rent. The eviction was opposed on the ground of suppression of facts, and on the ground that respondent herein is not owner of the premises in occupation of tenant as he lost his case in C. S. No. 14 of 1958 in all the Courts. The learned Rent Controller as well as appellate authority decided these issues against the tenant and ordered eviction.

(2.) THE admitted factual background, in brief, is as follows. Civil suit No. 14 of 1958 was filed before High Court of A. P. , by Dilidar-un-nissa Begum for partition of properties of Nawab Khurshid Jah, the Royal Noble, closely related to Nizam of Hyderabad. The petition schedule mulgi and other properties were included as item No. 30 of IV Schedule in the suit. When the suit was pending, saraswathi Prasad Singh through his GPA Thakur Ratan Singh purchased four mulgies (shops) under registered sale deed, dated 15. 03. 1962 from Jameel-un-nissa Begum, Showkat-un-nissa Begum, Daulat-un-nissa Begum, Yousuf-un-nissa begum and Meher-un-nissa Begum. These five ladies were defendant Nos. 19, 20, 26, 28 and 29 in C. S. No. 14 of 1958. It may also be noted that these five persons initially purchased the property from one Shamsuddin Khan; defendant No. 10 in c. S. No. 14 of 1958. The landlord then got impleaded as defendant No. 125 seeking a final decree in his favour to the extent of property purchased from the five defendants referred to hereinabove. Here, it may also be noted that Misbahuddin khan and Ghousuddin Khan were arrayed as defendant Nos. 51 and 52 in the said suit.

(3.) IN 1961, Dilidar-un-nissa Begum, the plaintiff and other defendants claiming possession of properties in Schedule IV and IV (a) filed Application No. 264 of 1961 under Order XXIII Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) to record memorandum of compromise. This Court passed orders in C. S. No. 14 of 1958 in terms of memorandum of compromise. Clause 7 of memorandum of compromise recorded by this Court is to the effect that parties to the memorandum admit that item no. 30 of IV Schedule attached to the plaint, belongs to defendant Nos. 51 and 52, who are exclusive owners of the same. A compromise decree was passed on 28. 06. 1963 in terms of memorandum of compromise.