S. DASARADHA RAMA REDDI, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is the landlord of the premises situated in a business locality at Parvatipuram. Prior to his purchase, the respondent tenant took it on a monthly rent of Rs. 140/- from the vendor in the year 1978 under Ex. A-2. As per the terms of the lease, the tenant can run the photo studio business and also reside in the premises. The landlord filed eviction petition in the year 1985 on the ground that he requires the premises for business purposes and that he has no other own building in the town. The main plea of the tenant in his counter is that the requirement is not bona fide and the eviction petition was filed to extract higher rent. The learned Rent Controller held that as the lease is composite for both residential and non-residential the eviction petition is not maintainable in view of the decision of this Court in Dr. Madhusudan mahuli vs. Lambu Indira Bai and dismissed the eviction petition without going into the question of bonafide requirement. On appeal, the appellate court held that the petitioner s requirement for business purposes is bonafide. However, it held that the eviction petition is not maintainable as the lease is compos

Click Here to Read the rest of this document