The trial and appellate courts lacked jurisdiction over eviction matters pertaining to a charitable trust as the property was exempt under the Telangana Buildings Act, highlighting that challenges to subject matter jurisdiction can be made at any stage.

Order:

RENUKA YARA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Sankalp Pissay, learned counsel for the revision petitioner/appellant/respondent and Mr. Murli Narayan Bung, learned counsel for the respondent/respondent/petitioner.

2. The present Civil Revision Petitions are filed aggrieved by the judgment of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court at Hyderabad in RCA Nos.33 and 34 of 2023, both dated 23.04.2024, wherein the said appeals were dismissed confirming the orders dated 31.10.2023 of the I Additional Rent Controller, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad in RC Nos.51 and 43 of 2017 respectively. The learned Appellate Court in RCA No.51 of 2017 confirmed the order of eviction against the petitioner herein and directed to handover the physical and vacant possession of the petition schedule premises to the respondent within two months of the date of order. Further, in RCA No.43 of 2017, the Appellate Court confirmed the order of fixing of fair rent at Rs.6,000/- per month and directed the petitioner to pay the same with enhancement of 5% for every year.

3. Since the parties, suit schedule property and grounds pleaded are one and the same, both the Civil Revision Petitions are heard together and disposed off by way of this common order.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has taken objection to the very maintainability of the proceedings under Telangana Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short ‘the Act’) as there is a bar of jurisdiction under Section 26 of the Act exempting certain buildings from the provisions of the Act by way of gazette notification. The Government has passed G.O.Ms.No.622, dated 04.05.1960 wherein the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh has exempted all buildings, godowns, etc., belonging to Hindu Charitable Institutions from the provisions of the Act. Said plea was raised in the appeal but the same was not considered by the Appellate Court and proceeded to dismiss the appeal confirming the order passed by the Trial Court.

5. To support his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the order of this Court in C.R.P.No.4318 of 2009 dated 28.01.2022, wherein a reference is made to G.O.Ms.No.622, dated 04.05.1960 and came to conclusion that the Trial Court has no jurisdiction to try the case as endowment property does not fall within the purview of the Act. Further, reference is made to order of this Court in case between Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman of Secunderabad and Hyderabad and others v. Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Hyd. and others , [2000 (1) ALD 482 (DB)] at paragraph No.15(2), wherein, it is held that Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act 30 of 1987 is applicable to all the charitable institutions regardless of any religion. It is argued that the respondent herein is an educational charitable trust and therefore, squarely covered by the order of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman (1 supra). In C.R.P.No.3885 of 2006, this Court held that the charitable and religious institutions were regulated by Hyderabad Endowment Regulations prior to enactment of A.P.Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 which covers every transfer of property made for religious purpose or charity or public utility other than estate granted subject to rendering of services.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that a specific ground was raised before the Appellate Court about the maintainability of the eviction petition before the Trial Court as charitable trust property does not come under the Act but no reasoning is given by the Appellate Court for not considering th