HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY C.R.P.No.2789 of 2014 Date : 3-9-2014 Between:
Mohd. Jamaluddin ..
Petitioner And B. Venugopal ..
Respondent Counsel for petitioner : Sri V. Ramakrishna Reddy Counsel for respondent : Sri K. Ravi Mahender The Court made the following :
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition arises out of order dated 24-4-2014 in R.A.No.10 of 2012 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar whereby she has confirmed order dated 31-8-2012 in R.C.No.22 of 2008 on the file of the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad, Kukatpally at Miyapur.
The respondent filed the above mentioned R.C. under Section 10(1)(a) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short "the Act"). In the petition, however, the respondent has pleaded both the grounds of bona fide requirement and wilful default. It is the pleaded case of the respondent that he has purchased the demised premises from its original owner and that the tenancy of the petitioner was attorned by the original owner in favour of the respondent. The petitioner has pleaded that no notice of attornment was given to him and that he was bona fide offering rents to the original owner, but he has refused to receive the same from August 2005. The petitioner has however not pleaded that he has filed an application under Section 8(5) of the Act for permission to deposit the rents in the Court.
Based on the respective pleadings of the parties, the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad, allowed the petition of the respondent and ordered eviction of the petitioner on both the grounds, namely, bona fide requirement and wilful default. These findings have been confirmed by the lower appellate Court in R.A.No.10 of 2012.
After strenuously arguing the case and upon realising that his client has no case on merits, Sri V. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned Counsel for the appellant, has pleaded for reasonable time for his client to vacate the demised premises.
Sri K. Ravi Mahender, learned Counsel for the respondent, stated that the petitioner is only running a chicken centre and that he is in arrears of Rs.41,250/- @ Rs.1100/- per month.
Considering the request of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the fact that the demised premises is put to use for a commercial purpose, I find it appropriate to allow the petitioner six months’ time to vacate the premises subject to the following conditions:
(i) Within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order, the petitioner shall deposit the entire arrears of rent calculated @ Rs.1100/- per month before the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad, Kukatpally at Mkyapur, to the credit of R.C.No.22 of 2008. While calculating the arrears, the amounts if any deposited by the petitioner during the pendency of the R.C. and the R.A., shall be given credit to.
(ii) The monthly rent @ Rs.1100/- from September 2014 shall be paid, on or before 5th of every succeeding month till the vacant possession of the premises is delivered to the respondent.
(iii) Within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order, the petitioner shall file an affidavit before the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad, Kukatpally at Miyapur, in R.C.No.22 of 2008, unconditionally undertaking to vacate the demised premises on the expiry of six months from today and handover vacant possession of the same to the respondent.
In default of any of the above conditions, the Civil Revision Petition will stand dismissed.
The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel to the disposal of the Civil Revision Petition, CRPMP No.3846 of 2014 filed for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 1-9-2014
AM