THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos. 2465 AND 2469 OF 2013 Dated:25-07-2014 Between:
N. Laxmi
... PETITIONER
AND
C. Aruna Bai
.. RESPONDENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos. 2465 AND 2469 OF 2013 COMMON ORDER:
The petitioner filed R.C No. 269 of 2008 before the I Additional Rent Controller-cum-XIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad against the respondent for eviction from the petition schedule property on the ground of bona fide requirement. The respondent filed a counter opposing the R.C. However, the relationship of tenant and landlord is not disputed.
The respondent filed I.A No. 307 of 2013 under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC with a prayer to recall RW 1 for the purpose of marking certain documents. I.A No. 15 of 2013 was also filed, with a prayer to receive certain documents. Through separate orders dated 25-04-2013, the learned Rent Controller allowed both the applications. Hence, these two revisions.
Heard Sri K.K. Waghray, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sarang Afzulpurkar, learned counsel for the respondent.
It is rather surprising to note that an eviction petition filed in the year 2008 is still pending before the Rent Controller. The petition ought not to have been kept pending for such a long time.
The respondent did not dispute that she is the tenant of the petitioner. However, the enquiry into the R.C is at an advanced stage. The recording of evidence on the part of petitioner is completed and on behalf of the respondent, three witnesses were examined. The respondent appears to have made an effort to bring to the notice of the learned Rent Controller that the petitioner is not in necessity of the premises. For that purpose, he wanted to rely upon certain documents. As a matter of fact, on an earlier occasion, he filed I.A No.113 of 2011, with a prayer to permit him to amend the counter. That I.A was dismissed and the order passed therein was upheld by this Court in a revision. The very basis for filing I.A No. 113 of 2011 is the two documents which are sought to be filed now. The objective underlying the filing of any document is only to prove the issue or controversy in the proceedings. When the very attempt to prove a particular issue or controversy within the fold of the RCC was rejected, the question of permitting the respondent to file those very documents does not arise.
Therefore, the C.R.Ps are allowed and the orders under revision are set aside. Rent Controller is directed to take up the matter on day to day basis and ensure that the matter is disposed of within three months from today, without granting adjournment under any circumstances.
The miscellaneous petitions filed in these revisions shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J
25th July, 2014 ks