KOTNALA NAGARATNAM Vs. NAINALA MADHAVARAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed ATC No.62 of 1993, before the Special Officer- cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Razole, against the respondents, in respect of Ac.0.70 cents of land, in Survey No.184/2A of Mamidikunduru Village, East Godavari District. She pleaded that the 1st respondent is her tenant, and he sub-leased the land to the 2nd respondent, without any authority. It was also alleged that the maktha for the land was not paid from the years 1991-92 onwards. Accordingly, she prayed for eviction of both the respondents. The 1st respondent remained ex parte, and the ATC was contested by the 2nd respondent alone. He denied the allegation, as to sublease, and pleaded that he is the tenant The allegation, as to default in payment of rent was also denied. Through its order, dated 31.8.1998, the trial Court allowed the ATC and ordered eviction of the respondents. The 2nd respondent filed ATA No.85 of 1998 before the District Judge, East Godavari. The appeal was allowed through judgment, dated 13.9.2004. Hence, this revision.

(2.) Sri M. Ram Mohan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that the trial Court recorded specific findings to the effect that the allegation as to sub-lease remained unrebutted and there was default in payment of rent, and that the said findings were reversed by the lower Appellate Court, without any basis. He contends that the very fact, that the decree passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Razole, in OS No.18 of 1993, for recovery of arrears of rent, became final, discloses that the allegation, as to non-payment of rent, stood proved, and there was no basis for the lower Appellate Court in interfering with the order passed by the trial Court.

(3.) Sri T. V.S. Prabhakar Rao, learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent, on the other hand, submits that his client is the actual tenant and that there was no sublease in his favour. Learned Counsel further submits that the jural relationship between the parties can be decided, only in the proceedings instituted under the A.P. (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act and not in a civil suit