IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Sri Justice Venuthurumalli Gopala Krishna Rao, J
Bharat petroleum corporation limited. – Appellant
Versus
Vedula surayanarayana murthy died – Respondent
Judgment :
(V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J.)
This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“C.P.C.” for short) is filed aggrieved against the Judgment and decree, dated 06.07.2021 in A.S.No.25 of 2017, on the file of the X Additional District & Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam at Anakapalle, confirming the Judgment and decree, dated 07.09.2017 in O.S.No.519 of 2003, on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anakapalle.
2. The appellant herein is the 1st defendant and the 1st respondent herein is the plaintiff and the respondent Nos.2 to 5 herein are defendant Nos.2 to 5 in O.S.No.519 of 2003, on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anakapalle.
During the pendency of the appeal, the 1st respondent died and his legal representatives were brought on record as respondent Nos.6 to 11.
3. The plaintiff initiated action in O.S.No.519 of 2003, on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anakapalle, with a prayer for eviction of the 1st defendant company from the schedule property and for costs of the suit.
4. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anakapalle, decreed the suit. Felt aggrieved of the same, the 1st defendant in the above said suit filed A.S.No.25 of 2017,
A tenant's long-term non-payment of rent negates claims for automatic lease renewal, emphasizing the necessity of fair conduct in exercising statutory rights.
A party seeking specific performance must demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform the contract, which was not established in this case due to non-payment of rent and lack of notice.
The court reaffirmed that a second appeal can only be entertained when a substantial question of law arises, not mere factual disputes or allegations lacking proof.
A second appeal under Section 100 of the C.P.C. requires the demonstration of substantial questions of law; mere disagreement does not suffice.
A second appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code requires the identification of substantial questions of law, which was not demonstrated in this case.
The importance of substantial questions of law in Second Appeal under Section 100 CPC and the principles of lease termination, landlord's right to possession, and lease termination notice requirement....
The High Court, in a second appeal under Section 100, cannot re-evaluate evidence, focusing only on substantial legal questions and confirming lower court findings unless proven erroneous.
A tenant cannot acquire title against the true owner, and the rights of subsequent purchasers are protected under law, emphasizing the obligation to vacate upon lease termination.
A tenant inducted by a mortgagee loses tenancy rights upon mortgage redemption, absent a direct contract with the mortgagor.
GPA and similar documents do not confer title to immovable property; legal heirs of the original allottee are entitled to possession.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.