SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 7701

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Harinath.N, J
Kanaka Pradeep Raju – Appellant
Versus
Dr.Chaganti Srinivas – Respondent
C.R.P.Nos.1085 and 1123 of 2020



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P Durga Prasad, E V V S Ravi Kumar
For the Respondents: M Indrani, Sai Gangadhar Chamarty

The court upheld the eviction of tenants where the landlord successfully established a bonafide requirement for the premises to open a professional clinic after retirement.

Headnote:The petitioners filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders of the Rent Appellate Controller and the Rent Control Court. The petitioners, as tenants of commercial premises, were ordered to be evicted after the landlord established a bonafide requirement for the premises to open a clinic following his retirement as a doctor from the State of Chhattisgarh. The court found the lower courts' findings on bonafide requirement to be well-reasoned. The central issue was whether the landlord had established a genuine bonafide requirement for the scheduled property. The court reasoned that the respondent's intention to open a clinic in his hometown after retirement was a valid ground for eviction, and the orders passed by the lower courts were well-considered and based on established facts. On these considerations, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed.

Table of Content
1. background of eviction based on landlord's bonafide requirement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. argument regarding the impact of rent payment status on eviction. (Para 4)
3. validation of landlord's bonafide requirement for establishing a professional clinic. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. dismissal of revision petitions with a grace period for vacating premises. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition to this Hon'ble Court aggrieved by Order and Decree dated 26-02-2020 passed in R.C.A.No. 15 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Rent Appellate Controller-cum Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, East. Godavari District confirming the Order and Decree dated 17-07-2018 passed in R.C.C.No. 9 of 2016 on the file of the Court of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, East Godavari District

IA NO: 1 OF 2020

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the Order and Decree dated 26-02-2020 passed in R.C.A.No. 15 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Rent Appellate Controller-cum-Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, East Godavari District confirming the Order and Decree dated 17-07-2018 passed in R.C.C.No. 9 of 2016 on the file of the Court of the Rent Controller-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, East Godavari District including the execution proceedings, pending disposal of C.R.P. and pass

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition against the judgment and decree dated. 17-07-2018 in R.C.C. 7/2016 on the file of the court of the Rent Control cum Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, which was confirmed in R.C.A 13/2018 on the file of Rent Control Appellant authority cum Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada

IA NO: 1 OF 2020

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including execution proceedings pursuant to the judgment and decree dated: 17-07-2018 in R.C.C. 7/2016 on the file of the court of the Rent Control cum Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, which was confirmed in R.C.A 13/2018 on the file of Rent Control Appellant authority cum Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, pending disposal of the C.R.P., in the interest of justice and pass such other

COMMON ORDER:

1. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the orders passed in Rent Control Appeal No.15 of 2018 and Rent Control Appeal No.13 of 2018 by the Rent Appellate Controller-cum-Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada. The petitioners herein are tenants who had taken the commercial premises on rent on a monthly rental basis from the respondent.

2. It is submitted that the landlord filed RCC No.9 of 2016 and RCC No.7 of 2016 before the House Rent Controller-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, seeking the relief of eviction and handing over the possession of the leased premises. The Rent Control Court allowed the RCCs filed by the respondent on 17.07.2018, primarily holding that the respondent had established the bonafide requirement of the said premises for his own use.

3. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed Rent Control Appeal Nos.15 of 2018 and 13 of 2018 before the Appellate Court. The Appellate Court dismissed the appeals vide orders dated 26.02.2020 and 21.03.2020, and confirmed the findings of the Rent Control Court in RCC Nos.9 of 2016 and 7 of 2016 with regard to the bonafide requirements e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top