JUDGMENT :-The appeal suit is directed against the judgment and decree dated 31-10-2003 passed in O.S.No.6 of 1994 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry.

(a) The appellants are Defendants 1 to 4 and 6 in the suit O.S. No.6 of 1994 filed by the first respondent herein, the fifth defendant is the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board, who is the second respondent herein and the seventh defendant died, who is the third respondent herein, and his legal representatives were not brought on record in the suit. The suit was originally filed by M/s. Subedar Saheb Choultry Trust Board represented by its President- Md. Raheem Khan and thereafter the name of Md. Raheem Khan was deleted and the proposed President Md. Kareem Khan was added as per orders in I.A. No.27 of 2002 dated 4-2-2002 in the said suit. The suit was filed for declaration of the title deeds obtained by the Defendants 1 to 4 and 6 and 7 registered on 12-6-1945 in respect of the plaint schedule property as void, unenforceable and not binding on the plaintiff and to set aside the same and to grant permanent injunction against them and to pay a sum of Rs.1,500/- per month towards damages from 12-8-1995 till the date of delivery of the suit schedule property and to pay costs.

The said suit was decreed against the Defendants 1 to 4 and 6 and 7 by judgment and decree dated 31-10-2003. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree this appeal has been filed.

(b) The petitioners in all the civil revision petitions are the tenants, who suffered common eviction order dated 27 -2-1998 in the eviction petitions filed by the landlords in R.C.C. Nos.19, 31, 25, 27, 21, 36, 23, 34, 19, 33, 35, 55, 32, 26, 62, and 24 of 1986 respectively under provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short the Act) on the file of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry. Aggrieved by the same they preferred respective appeals in R.C.A.Nos.10, 15, 13,22,8,21,16,12,7,17,18,9, 44,23,36 and 11 of 1998 before the Appellate Authority (Principal Senior Civil Judge), Rajahmundry and the same were dismissed by common judgment dated 3-4-2002.

Assailing the said judgment the tenants filed the present revisions. Prior to the aforesaid eviction petitions the tenants filed R.C.C.Nos.54, 58 to 73 and 84 of 1985 under Section 9 of the Act seeking permission to deposit the rents into the Court and the same were dismissed by the aforesaid common order dated 27-2-1998 and the appeals preferred by them being R.C.A.Nos.35, 32, 26, 42, 43, 36, 41,30,40,37,28, 34, 27, 31, 39, 29, 33 and 38 of 1998,respectively were also dismissed by the aforesaid common judgment dated 3-4-2002, against which the tenants did not prefer any revisions.

The learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties submit that the fate of the civil revision petitions filed under Section 22 of the Act depends upon the declaration of title of the landlords to be decided in the appeal suit.

(c) Admittedly, the vendors of the landlords inducted the petitioners as tenants and there was no dispute with regard to the relationship of the landlords and the tenants within the meaning of the provisions of the Act. All the eviction petitions filed by the landlords on the grounds of denial of title without any bona fides on the part of the tenants, for wilful default in payment of rents and that the said premises in occupation of the tenants are required for the personal use and occupation to commence business by the landlords were allowed as there was no dispute with regard to the ownership and the applications under Section 9 of the Act filed by the tenants seeking permission to deposit the rents in the Court were dismissed by common order dated 27-2-1998. All the aforesaid grounds on which eviction petitions were allowed, were confirmed by the appellate authority holding that the denial of title by the tenants is not bona fide; that the tenants have committed wilful default in payment of rents and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document