Inasmuch as these two civil revision petitions emanate from a common judgment dated 17-1-2004 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad, in R.C.A.No.4 of 1999, they can be disposed of together.

2. Civil Revision Petition No.4261 of 2006 was filed by the tenant-petitioner assailing the concurrent findings of both the Courts below that he committed wilful default in paying the rents.

3. Civil Revision Petition No. 5347 of 2004 was filed by the landlords assailing the finding given by the learned Senior Civil Judge inter alia in his order that the premises in question is a building coming within the definition of building as given under the Act in question.

4. R.C.No.20 of 1991 was filed by the landlords seeking eviction of the tenant. His case was that the premises in question consisting of Khandsari Sugar Mill, three large sized godowns, thirteen RCC constructed rooms, two chowkidar sheds along with adjacent land, all put together bearing Municipal No.10-7-616/16 situate at Varni - Mosra road, Nizamabad, was owned by the math and the entire area is admeasuring 19210 square yards and was leased out to the first respondent-tenant who had floated a company in the name and style of M/s. B. Kishan Lal Khandasari Sugar Mill under three different lease deeds. In the first instance, an area of 11720 square yards was leased on 21-11-1959 through a registered lease deed on a monthly rent of Rs.150/- per month, for a period of ten years. Thereafter, the first respondent obtained another plot admeasuring 5855 square yards through another registered lease deed dated 17-7-1962 on a monthly rent of Rs.50/- and finally on 31-5-1969 the first respondent-tenant obtained another plot admeasuring 1634.15 square yards belonging to the math under a registered lease deed dated 31-5-1969 on a monthly rent at Rs.250/- and the lease was continued for ten years, which expired on 31-5-1979 and the first respondent-tenant did not vacate the demised premises even after the expiry of the lease period. That the total rent was payable at Rs.450/- per month for the demised premises, but since 1969, the tenant has been paying Rs.250/- per month and thereby he committed wilful default, and the premises in question was required bona fide for the personal occupation of the petitioners, inasmuch as it was required for performing the functions like marriages, thread ceremonies, etc., which functions used to be conducted in the verandah of the sanctum Sanctorium of the temple constructed by the math, and that tenant unauthorisedly (sublet) three godowns to Majdoor Bidi Karkhana owned by one Isaac Sahab three years prior to the date of filing of the application, who in turn sublet the premises to one Shikari Bidi Karkhana and has been receiving a monthly rent of Rs.5,000/- and thus they rendered themselves liable for eviction. The landlords got a legal notice, dated 31-5-1991, issued to the tenant-first respondent calling him upon to vacate the demised premises, to which, the respondents gave a false reply dated 27-2-1991 and even has gone to the extent of mortgaging the demised premises to the State Bank of Hyderabad, branch office at Nizamabad.

5. That application was resisted by the first respondent by filing his counter. Since the first respondent died during the pendency of the application, the other respondents brought on record as his legal heirs, the plea of the respondents was that the petitioners were not empowered to file the application inasmuch as the properties of the math were administered by the Matadhipathi posted at Nizamabad from time to time and also they did not receive any authorisation from the head office to prosecute such an eviction petition. The rent payable was not Rs.450/- per month as claimed, but under the last lease deed it was fixed at Rs.250/- per month and therefore the tenant did not commit any default much less wilful default. They denied the allegation of sub-lease and receiving the rent.

6. Upon the above pleadings, the