( 1 ) HEARD Sri Balaji representing Sri Gudapati Venkateswara Rao, learned counsel representing the appellant, and Sri krishnaiah, learned counsel representing the respondent.

( 2 ) ON 1-2-2002, the second appeal was admitted by this court on the following substantial questions of law in ground nos. 9 (1)to (3): (1) Whether the lower appellate court can pass an order of eviction of the premises which described as thatched shed which comes under a. P. Building (Lease, Rent and eviction Control) Act, 1960 under section 2 (iii) by way of a regular suit? (2) Whether the civil court has jurisdiction under Section 9 of Code of Civil Procedure to entertain the suit, which was expressly barred by the A. P. Building (Lease, Rent and eviction Control) Act, 1960? (3) Whether ignoring the weight of evidence, proceedings on wrong or wrong premises of law or deriving such conclusions from the established facts as betray a lack of reasons and or objectivity would render the findings of the appellate court not according to law calling for interference under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure?

( 3 ) ONE Sri Panga Illayya, defendant in p. S. No. 159 of 1992 on the file of Ad