IMPORTANT POINT
Senior citizen landlords are entitled to immediate possession under Section 10C of the Act without needing to prove bona fide requirement as strictly as under other provisions.

ORDER :

Nyapathy Vijay, J.

1. The present Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 questioning the Order dated 13.06.2013 in R.C.A.No.9 of 2011 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nellore confirming the Order dated 13.06.2013 in R.C.C.No.35 of 2006 passed by the Rent Controller-cum- Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nellore.

2. The parties are addressed as landlord and tenant.

3. The R.C.C.No.35 of 2006 was filed by the landlord seeking to evict the tenant. It is the plea of the landlord that the tenant joined in the schedule premises on 05.03.2003 for a period of 2 years on a monthly rent of Rs.1,650/-. On expiry of 2 years, the tenant requested the landlord for continuing him as tenant for one more year till 05.03.2006 on a monthly rent of Rs.1,900/- and the landlord agreed for the same. Subsequently, the lease was further extended for another 6 months. Thereafter, the landlord requested the tenant that the premise is required for the job work of her second son. On such request, the tenant requested the landlord to adjust the rent of Rs.1,900/- per month out of the advance of Rs.12,000/- paid by him. Further, even after the advance amount was adjusted by the landlord, the tenant did not vacate the premises and demanded an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to vacate the petition schedule shop. The tenant further filed O.S.No.1014 of 2016 against the landlord for permanent injunction on the alleged threat of dispossession. The landlord’s case was that she has two sons and they have to maintain their family and as such the scheduled premises is required for the said purpose.

4. The tenant filed a counter, obviously denying the allegations of the landlord. It was the plea of the tenant that because of the hard work and industrious effort made by the tenant, the scheduled premises came into focus. The tenant further denied the plea of bona fide requirement as the second son of the landlord was running rival job work in a shop away from the tenant, at least two years prior to filing of the petition. It was further contended that the tenant was regular in paying the rents. Since force was threatened to be used against the tenant for evicting him, the tenant out of lack of choice, had to file suit for permanent injunction.

5. The Rent Controller framed the following issues for consideration:-

(i) Whether the respondent committed willful default in payment of rents?

(ii) Whether petitioner requires the schedule shop room for additional accommodation?

(iii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

6. The Rent Controller held all the issues against the petitioner and dismissed the R.C.C. Thereupon, the landlord filed R.C.A.No.9 of 2011 and the same was dismissed. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is filed.

7. Heard Sri J.Venu Gopal Rao, learned senior counsel representing Sri V. Venkata Subbaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner and M.Janardhana Rao, learned counsel for the Respondent. After hearing the respective counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the following points fall for consideration:-

a) Whether the orders of the Courts below without referring to amended Section 10C of the Act can be sustained?

b) Whether the findings of the Courts below on the aspect of bona fide requirement of premises by the landlord can be sustained?

8. Point No. (a): The Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 was amended vide Act No.17 of 2005. As per the amendment, Sections 10A, 10B and 10C were introduced among other provisions. The provision that is relevant for the purpose of this case is Section 10-C and the same reads as under:-

“10C. Right to recover immediate possession of premises to accrue to a widow:

(1) Where the landlord is: (a) a widow and the premises let out by her, or by her husband;

(b) a handicapped person and the premises let out by him;

(c) a person who is of the age of sixty-five years or more and the premi