S BASHA Vs. D B INDIRAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision filed by the tenant questioning the concurrent orders of eviction passed against him by the two Courts below under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960.

(2.) The respondent/landlady filed the petition for eviction on the sole ground that she bonafide requires the suit premises for her own occupation i.e., for the purpose of opening a fancy store by her unemployed son. The petition was resisted by the tenant contending that the alleged requirement was neither true nor bonafide and that the petition for eviction was filed as a counter-blast to the suit filed by him against the landlady and her children for recovery of possession of a portion of the property which was sold by them earlier to him under the sale deed dated 8-11-1979. The Rent Controller as well as the Appellate Authority upheld the plea of bona fide requirement and ordered eviction.

(3.) The undisputed facts of the case are that the suit premises, which is a shop room and which is a part of the residential building belonging to the respondent's husband late Tirumala Rao was let out to the petitioner some time during 1977 for the purpose of running a tailoring shop therein. In the year 1979 petitioner purchased the rear portion of the house from Tirumala Rao. In that portion which was purchased by him, the petitioner constructed 5 shop rooms and let out all those shops to others but continued as a tenant in the suit premises. According to the respondent, the petitioner promised to vacate the suit premises soon after the compeletion of the construction of the said shop rooms by the petitioner. But contrary to the promise made by him, he continued to squat on the suit premises. As the respondent and her family members were demanding him to vacate the suit premises, he filed OS No. 1306 of 1987 with false allegations contending that a portion of the property sold to him was not delivered to him. It is the further case of the respondent that her husband died in the year 1986 leaving behind him herself and two sons and two daughters, that one daughter only is married and that her first son Venkatesu, who is unemployed, and the other unmarried daughter are living with her and they are dependent on her. As her son Venkatesu could not secure a job, they have decided to open a fancy shop for him in the schedule premises.