N WILLIAMS Vs. H PASHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The petitioner is the tenant. The respondent - landlord filed a case in R.C.C. No. 3/1989 on the file of Principal District Munsif (Rent Controller), Eluru against the petitioner-tenant for eviction on the grounds of wilful default and bona fide requirement. The Rent Controller gave a finding in favour of the landlord stating that the landlord has proved wilful default, but further held that he is not entitled for eviction on the ground of bona fide requirement in view of Section 10(4)(ii) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (in short 'the Act'), as the building in question is being used as an educational institute and it has been recognised by the Government. The tenant did not prefer any appeal against that order. However, the landlord preferred an appeal before the appellate Court in C.M.A.No. 2/1994, challenging the order of the Rent Controller in R.C.C.No. 3/1989, refusing the eviction on the ground that there is an educational institution in the building in question. The appellate Court allowed the appeal and directed the eviction of the petitioner - tenant. In these circumstances, it is the tenant, who has come up before this Court in this revision petition.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner - tenant strenuously contended that both the Courts below are in error in holding that there is a wilful default on the part of the petitioner - tenant in paying the rent. At any rate, the Courts also are in error in ordering eviction against the petitioner, since the petitioner is running an educational institution in the building in question and it is recognised by the Government. On the other hand, the Counsel appearing for the respondent - landlord supported both the orders of Courts below.