SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1987 Supreme(AP) 247

RAMA RAO
MADHUSUDAN MAHULI – Appellant
Versus
Lambu Indira Bai – Respondent


RAMA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition at the instance of the tenant is under the provisions of the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960. The landlord filed the petition for eviction of the tenant from premises bearing door No. 824 in ward No. 25 on the ground of bana fide requirement for residential purpose. The plea of the tenant is that the tenancy from the inception is for residential as well as non-residential purposes and the petition for bona fide requirement for residential purposes/only is not maintainable and the bona fide requirement does not arise. The plea of the tenant is amplified by stating that the house bearing door No. 824 is exclusively used for clinic and the other portion bearing door No. 806 is used by the com-pounder in the clinic for residence. The Rent Controller held that the requirement for personal occupation by the landlord is not bona fide and the provisions of Rent Control Act are not applicable and further the premises bearing door No. 824 for which eviction is sought is a non-residential one. On appeal at the instance of the landlady the appellate authority held that the provisions of Rent Control Act are applicable in vie










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top