BHUPENDRA N PATEL Vs. HARSHAVARDHAN CHOKKANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 20 of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 against the orders of the learned Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad (appellate authority) in RA No.126 of 1993 dated 26-2-1997 confirming the order of the learned Principal Rent Controller, Secunderabad in RCNo.189/1988 dated 31-12-1992.

(2.) Certain facts leading to the filing of the Civil Revision Petition are set up herein after. One Smt. Pola Rajamaniamma was the landlord of the premises bearing Municipal No.4-6-241 to 4-6-244 (Old No. 1883), Subhash Road, Subric Street, Secunderabad. A rental agreement was concluded between the landlady and Mr. Harshavardhan Chokkani, the respondent herein on 23-11-1973 wherein one mulgi in the said premises was let out to Mr. Harshavardhan Chokkani for non-residential purpose. Subsequently, in the year 1987 the owner sold away the property to Mr. Babulal N. Patel and Bhupendra N. Patel duly attorning the tenancy in favour of the vendees. However, Mr. Babulal N. Patel died subsequently. Thereafter, an application in RC No.189/1988 was filed by Mr. Bhupendra N. Patel and the legal heirs of Babulal N. Patel before the Rent Controller at Secunderabad seeking eviction on the ground of bona fide requirement was wilful default in payment of rent. The matter was contested by the respondent. The learned Rent Controller framed the following issues :

(3.) The learned senior Counsel Mr. E. Manohar, appearing for the petitioner/landlords submits that the findings recorded by the lower Court as confirmed by the appellate Court of all the three issues are legally untenable and that the Courts below misconstrued the provisions of law and fact, thereby committed errors apparent on the face of records. He submits that the revision is maintainable to check the errors of law and also the jurisdiction. He relies on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in M/s. Bhoolchand v. M/s. Kay Pee Cee Investments, AIR 1991 SC 2053 and Rukmini Amma Saradamma v. Kallyani Sulochana, AIR 1993 SC 1616.