The main legal point established in the judgment is that tenants cannot deny the status of a landlord based on the agreed rent and must provide satisfactory evidence to support their claims.

ORDER :

These Civil Revision Petitions arise out of similar orders passed by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Appellate Authority under Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter called in short “Rent Control Act”) Vijayawada in five Rent Control Appeals filed by the petitioners/tenants against the Orders passed by Rent Controller-Cum-IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada on same dates in different similar petitions. Since the question of law, facts and issues which arises to be dealt with in all Civil Revision petitions are similar and the matters are distinct only in their receptive petitioners/tenants names those are being disposed of by common orders.

2. These Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Section 22 of Rent control Act against the orders dated 02.05.2015 passed in Rent Control appeals filed by the petitioners/tenants on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Appellate Authority, Vijayawada wherein and whereby learned Appellate Judge dismissed appeals filed by the petitioners/tenants confirming the orders passed by learned Rent Controller-cum-IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada in Rent Control cases, dated 31.10.2014. The respondent/landlord is common in all Rent Control cases filed against five tenants, who are petitioners herein.

3. The respondent filed five Rent Control cases against five petitioners/tenants in respect of five shop rooms situated within the limits of Vijayawada Municipal Corporation under Section 10(2) (i) of Rent Control Act for eviction of petitioners/tenants from petition schedule shop rooms on the ground of willful default in payment of rents stating that petitioners herein are tenants in non-residential shop rooms for a monthly rent of Rs.10,000/- and tenancy is month to month. The respondent submits that the petition schedule shop rooms belongs to joint family of himself and 13 other family members wherein the petitioners herein are tenants, who used to pay rents to his brother Chalumuri Ramanjaneya Surya Chandra Sekhara Rao and due to dispute in the family of partition suit has been filed wherein preliminary decree passed on 24.03.2009 in O.S.No.280 of 2007 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Vijayawada, against which an Appeal in A.S.No.393 of 2009 filed by the brother of respondent, which is pending before this Court. It is the contention of the respondent that in the said Appeal Suit, he filed petition for appointment of receiver to collect rents in A.S.M.P.No.1266 of 2010 wherein this Court passed orders on 06.08.2010 permitting him to collect monthly rents from the tenants from August, 2010 onwards due to that he is entitled to collect monthly rents from respective tenants and then he issued legal notice to the tenants on 02.09.2010 informing them about the orders passed by this Court, for which, they issued reply alleging that they have no knowledge about the partition suit which they came to know after receiving legal notice but there is no written legal agreement between themselves and Chalumuri Ramanjaneya Surya Chandra Sekhara Rao, who leased out petition schedule shop rooms on a monthly rent of Rs.3,000/- but not for Rs.10,000/- and thereafter the respondent issued rejoinder notice on 22.10.2010 and then the petitioners herein said to be paid rents to him from August, 2010 to December, 2011 through Demand Drafts which he received by restricting the claim of quantum of rent to admitted rents without prejudice to their rights and contentions. The respondent alleged that the petitioners have paid rents by way of Demand Drafts lastly on 12.01.2012 for the month of December, 2011 and thereafter they have not paid any rents from January, 2012 inspite of his repeated demands thereby they committed default in payment of rents and then he issued legal notice, dated 14.08.2012 demanding them to vacate from petition schedule shop rooms inspite of which they have not paid any arrears of rent, but iss