The appellate authority can rely on the finding of the Rent Controller that the relationship of landlord and tenant exists for passing an order under Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960.

( 1 ) THIS revision arises out of an order of the Chief Judge, City Small causes Court. Hyderabad in Kent Appeal No. 550 of 1971 dated 29-3-1972 by vvhich the learned judge directed dismissal of the appeal preferred by the the petitioner herein.

( 2 ) IT is necessary to state a few facts to appreciate the points raised in this revision petition. The respondent herein filed an application claiming to be the owner of the building No. 14 -1 -67. sauare at Seetharampeth hyderabad, in R C No. 320 of 1969 against the petitioner here in (said to be be the tenants on the ground rhai the petitioner herein is the tenait of the house on a monthly rental of Rs. 65/- that the petitioner herein has also excuted a rental deed in favour of the respondent on, 10-8 1966 that the petitioner is liable to pay the monthly rent, as per the lease from month to month, and that the petitioner herein has failed to pay the rent accordingly. The landlord has also claimed a sum of Rs. 525/- towards arrears of rent by the petitioner herein upto end of December, 1967, a sum of Rs. 660/- from January. 1968 to the end of December 1968, a sum of Rs. 385/- from january 1969 to the end of December I9 9 when the eviction petition was filed Thus he claimed a cotal sum of Rs 1560/ -. as ai rears of rent due by the petitioner herein

( 3 ) THE petitioner herein conteited the petition on the ground that he is not the tenant at all in the premises in question, that he was actually residing in another house bearing No 14 1-153. situated at Seetharampeth. Hyderabad. He also stated that the respondent herein is neither the landlord nor is he 3 tenant in respect of the suit premises. He also denied the execution of the rental deed in favour of the respondent He denied that he was in occupation of the suit premises He further says that one Syed vali Bahadur is still residing in the suit premises.

( 4 ) ON these contentions the Rent Controller recorded evidence and pronounced his order on 5-7-1971 allowing the petition for eviction.

( 5 ) AGAINST the decision of the learned Rent Controller, the petitioner herein carried the matter in appeal before the Appellate Authority in the grounds of appeal, the petitioner herein has taken objection in grounds 3 to 5 to some of the inregularities by the Rent Controller which are as follows -"that the Court below gave much weight to the oral and documentary evidence of the respondent-petitionerr and did not consider --he evidence of this appellant, respondent, though the respondent petitioner miserably failed to cstablish the very relationship of land-ford and tenant between the parties even for a moment Inspite cf this the learned Additional rent Controller passed the order undei appeal Against the material available on the record which seeks the juristrcattention of this Hou ble Court""the respondent petitioner muserably failed to prove the so called rental deted said to have been executed by this appellant respondent even then the loewer court passed the order under appeal on presumption which draws the juristic attention of his Hon ble Court. ""that the appeilant established his stardly and documentary evidence that he has no concern w ith the suit premises, neither reside therein, nor executed the rental deed. That the Additional Rent Conceller did not look into this fact and passed is corect order under appeal basing it on presumption against the spirit of law "

( 6 ) AFTER the appeal was filed, the respondent hot em appears to have filed an application No 82 of 1972 for directions 10 the petitiore herein to pay rent of Rs. 3,155/ -. for the period from March 1967 to end of December, 1971 at Rs. 55/-per -month, failing which to step all further proceedings and order the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building by evicting the respo-dent herein. This application was filed under Section 11 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960. To this application the petitioner herein filed a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document