JUDGMENT :

M. VENKATA RAMANA, J.

1. The defendant is the appellant. The respondent was the plaintiff in O.S. No. 213 of 2014 on the file of the Court of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nellore. The respondent laid the suit for eviction of the appellant from the demised premises, for arrears of rent and with future interest at 12% per annum from the date of the suit till realisation.

2. The demised premises is a commercial property at Stone House Pet of Nellore City bearing Old Door No. 6/72, New Door No. 6/122 that included a tiled house and two godowns within the boundaries described in the plaint schedule. The demised premises admittedly belonged to the respondent. The defendant initially was his tenant of the tiled portion and later on he became the tenant of two godowns attached to it. On the date of the suit, the admitted rent was Rs. 13,500/- per month.

3. The respondent instituted the suit on the ground that the appellant defaulted to pay the rents inspite of his demands and that he got issued a composite notice dated 22.11.2013 to the appellant demanding Rs. 6,48,000/- being arrears of rent for four years. It was served according to the respondent, where he offered to renew the lease at the then current rental structure, and since the appellant did not come forward, the tenancy was determined thereby. Upon deducting the payments whatever made by the appellant to the respondent, ultimately, the amount due towards the arrears stood at Rs. 5,88,000/- and with interest thereon, the total claim stood at Rs. 8,92,750/-.

4. The appellant resisted the claim of the respondent on several grounds denying that he was a defaulter in paying I the rents and denying that a notice was issued to him on 22.11.2013 upon such terms and conditions. He further pleaded that the amount if any payable towards rent as claimed by the respondent is incorrect and this claim is settled on account of the repairs effected by him to the demised premises spending his money and that he had arranged sofas, chairs etc. for “Sumangali Kalyana Mandapam” started by the respondent on account of which the respondent was liable to pay Rs. 1,50,000/- there on with interest. He also claimed that the suit claim barred by limitation and referred to many mediations to settle this dispute in between them through the elders of the locality.

5. Basing on the above pleadings, the learned Trial Judge settled the issues for trial as under:

“1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for eviction and delivery of the plaint schedule property from the defendant, as prayed for?

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for arrears of rent to a tune of Rs. 8,92,750/- alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum?

3. Whether the claim of rents due is barred by limitation?

4. To what relief?”

6. Both the parties thereupon entered trial, where the respondent examined himself as PW-1 while relying on Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 and that the appellant examined himself as DW-1.

7. On the material and the evidence, learned Trial Judge, by the judgment dated 22.3.2019 decreed the suit directing the appellant to vacate the demised premises within three (03) months from that date, hand over peaceful and vacant possession of the same to the respondent while further directing payment of arrears of rent at Rs. 8,50,500/- alongwith interest at 12% per annum from the date of the suit till realisation. However, the arrears of rent is directed to be calculated by the respondent after deducting the amounts paid by the appellant during pendency of the suit for the period from January, 2014 to March, 2019. It was further directed that the respondent could proceed against the appellant in the event of his failure to comply with the above directions, in accordance with law.

8. Aggrieved, the respondent preferred an appeal in A.S. No. 54 of 2019 on the file of the Court of learned Principal District Judge, Nellore. By the decree and judgment dated 6.12.2019, the learned Appellate Judge dismissed A.S. No. 54 of 2019 and also cros