G.Ravindranath Yadav v. B.Satynarayana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI Civil Revision Petition No.721 of 2015 ORDER:

In this tenant's revision under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 ('the Act', for brevity) the tenant had assailed the order dated 30.01.2015 of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, the appellate authority under the Act, passed in RA.no.16 of 2013 whereby the said authority while dismissing the said appeal had confirmed the orders of eviction dated 30.10.2013 of the learned Rent Controller-cum-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri passed in RC.no.1 of 2011.

2. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for both the sides. I have perused the material record.

3. The eviction was sought on the ground of bona fide personal requirement; and, both the Courts having adverted to the facts correctly and appreciated the evidence in proper perspective had ordered eviction on the ground of bona fide personal requirement of the landlord. This Court on 27.02.2015, considering the fact that the revision petitioner has suffered concurrent findings of fact regarding bona fide requirement, had recorded a finding that there is no ground to admit the CRP; however, this Court directed notice to the respondent/landlord only for consideration in regard to the reasonable time that is to be granted to the revision petitioner/tenant for vacating the subject premises. Since that date, a year's time has passed.

4. In this background, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/tenant requests that a time of ten (10) months be granted and the revision petition be disposed of confirming the order of the learned appellate authority, which is impugned in this revision.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent/landlord would submit that in

view of the fact that one year time was already availed by the revision petitioner/tenant and that eviction was sought on the ground of bona fide personal requirement, a time of two (02) months may be granted to meet the ends of justice.

6. Having regard to the submissions and in view of the fact that there is no merit in the revision petition, this Court is of the considered view that the revision petition can be disposed of granting time for eviction.

7. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed confirming the orders of the Court below granting a time of six (06) months to the revision petitioner/tenant to vacate and handover vacant peaceful possession of the schedule property to the respondent/landlord. It is needless to mention that the revision petitioner shall pay all arrears and continue to pay the admitted rent till he vacates and handover possession of the schedule property to the landlord as directed in these orders. As undertaken today by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the revision petitioner/tenant shall file an undertaking affidavit, before the Registry by 28.04.2016 without fail, to the effect that he would abide by the directions and vacate the property as directed in these orders.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this revision shall stand closed.

_____________________ M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J 20th April, 2016 Vjl