1. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 15.03.2010 passed in R.A.No.35 of 2009 by the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad (‘the lower appellate authority’, for brevity), whereby and whereunder, the order dated 10.12.2008 passed in R.C.No.197 of 2006 by the II Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad (‘the Rent Controller’, for brevity) was confirmed.

2. The petitioner herein is the landlord and the respondent herein is the tenant of the mulgi bearing municipal No.9-4-76/1/6 situated at Toli Chowki Main Road, Hyderabad (petition schedule mulgi). For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they were arrayed before the Rent Controller.

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-

The petitioner filed R.C.No.197 of 2006 before the Rent Controller under Sections 10(2) (i) and 10(3) (a)(iii) of the A.P.Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960, seeking eviction of the respondent from the petition schedule mulgi contending inter alia that he is the owner of the petition schedule mulgi; that the respondent had obtained the same on rent from him under a registered Rental Deed dated 27.01.2005 vide document No.0282/2005 for a period of nine months, i.e., till the end of September, 2005 and agreed to pay a monthly rent of Rs.3,300/- per month excluding electricity charges and Municipal Property Taxes; that from the date of inception of tenancy, the respondent is irregular in payment of rents; that he is a businessman and needs the petition schedule mulgi for his personal use and occupation, i.e., to start his own business; that he has got sufficient funds and experience to start his own business; that since the term of tenancy has expired in November, 2005, he issued a legal notice dated 24.08.2005 to the respondent asking him to vacate the petition schedule mulgi; that the respondent issued reply notice dated 14.09.2005 with false allegations; that the respondent, in spite of vacating the petition schedule mulgi, filed a suit in O.S.No.6417 of 2005 on the file of the VI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, seeking perpetual injunction; that the respondent had willfully defaulted the payment of rents from October, 2005 to February, 2006, i.e., for a period of five months; that he, by oversight, has filed a Eviction Civil Suit against the respondent in S.R.No.60 of 2006 but the same was returned on 21.02.2006 with a direction to present before the proper Court.

4. The respondent contested the matter and filed counter denying the material averments made by the petitioner and contended that he is the tenant in the petition schedule mulgi; that since the commencement of the tenancy, he is doing the business in the name and style of M/s.S.N.Kirana Merchant in the petition schedule mulgi; that an advance of Rs.50,000/- is lying with the petitioner as deposited by his brother – S.M.Hanees, who was the earlier tenant in the petition schedule mulgi; that as his brother vacated the petition schedule mulgi to start a new business at some other place, he became the tenant of the petition schedule mulgi; that the said deposit of Rs.50,000/-is refundable at the time of vacating the petition schedule mulgi, i.e., after five years as per the oral agreement between himself and the petitioner. The respondent further denied that he is irregular in payment of rents from the inception of the tenancy. His further case is that the petitioner used to pass rental receipts to him; that the rent for the month of September, 2005 was sent through Money Order along with the rent of October, 2005, but the petitioner has refused to receive the same; that thereafter, he field R.C.No.67 of 2006 before the Principal Rent Controller and obtained interim orders and accordingly, he is depositing the rents to the credit of the said R.C.; that the petitioner is not in need of the petition schedule mulgi for his personal use and occupation, i.e., to start his own business;