( 1 ) THE C. R. P, is filed assailing the Order of the learned Rent Control Appellate authority-cum-Senior Civil Judge, Nellore in C. M. A. No. 14 of 1992 affirming the order of the learned Rent Controller-cum- district Munsif in R. C. C. No. 44 of 1985, dated 14-9-1992-

( 2 ) THE petitioners are the tenants. The respondent-landlords filed petition for eviction in R. C. C. No. 44 of 1985 on the ground of wilful default, bona fide requirement and that the tenant committed acts of damage which materially affected the utility of the premises.

( 3 ) BEFORE the lower Court it is the case of the respondent-landlords that the premises which is the petition schedule property -fell to their share in a partnership dissolution proceedings in the year 1970. Subsequently, in 1971, they constructed the buildings and installed machinery in the premises for running a sawmill. But, however, the same was let out to the 1st respondent-tenant in the year 1976, for the purpose of running the mill, On a monthly rent of Rs. 700/ -. The tenancy was month to month and the rent was payable on 1st of every succeeding month. The tenant committed wilful default in payment of rent for the month of January and February, 1985 and even though the rent was paid at a later stage, it amounted to wilful default and therefore, the tenant was liable to be evicted.

( 4 ) WITH regard to the bona fide requirement, it is the case of the petitioners that they were partners in a timber depot and in the year 1970, the partnership was dissolved and therefore, the vacant site fell to the share of the petitioners and buildings were constructed for running the sawmill and necessary machinery was also installed. However, they could not personally, see the sawmill but it was leased out to the tenants. The petitioners, however, were carrying on the business under the partnership under the name and style of Sri Venkateswara finance and Pawn Brokers, Santhapet, nellore. However as the years went on, the business did not flourish, and the petitioners have been demanding for evicting (sic. vacating) the premises to enable them to run the sawmill business. While so, the tenants filed O. S. No. 124 of 1985 seeking permanent injunction in the court of I Additional District Munsif Court, nellore. It is also stated that the tenants have caused damage to the compound wall by putting the timber in pelmel with the result, the entire walls fell down. Thus, the damage had materially affected the utility of the building. Further, it is stated that the respondents secured alternative accommodation by purchasing the property in Nawabpet, Nellore and they are liable to be evicted. The petition was resisted by the tenants. Basing on the respective contentions, the learned Rent Controller framed the following issues: (1) Whether the 1st respondent committed wilful default in payment of rents? If so, whether the respondents are liable to be evicted? (2) Whether the requirement of the petitioner is bona fide, if so, whether the respondents are liable to be evicted from the petition schedule premises? (3) Whether the 1st respondent committed any acts of damage which materially affected the utility of premises ? If so, whether the respondents are liable to be evicted from petition schedule premises? (4) To What relief?

( 5 ) ON behalf of the landlords, one witness was examined and Ex. A-1 was marked. On behalf of the tenants three witnesses were examined and Exs. B-1 to b-6 were marked.

( 6 ) THE learned trial Court after considering the matter with reference to the evidence and documents available on record, held that the tenants committed wilful default payment of rent and the respondents-landlords established bona fide requirement. However, they could not establish that the damage has been caused by the tenants materially affecting the utility of the premises. Therefore, the petition was decreed directing the respondents to vacate the premises by an order dated 14-9-1992. Aggrieved b