THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CITY CIVIL COURT APPEAL No.117 OF 2019

JUDGMENT:

This is an appeal filed by the appellant – defendant, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 21.01.2019 passed in O.S.No.418 of 2016 by the learned I Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short “the trial Court”).

2. The parties are addressed herein as they were arrayed in the suit before the trial Court for the sake of convenience and clarity.

3. The case of the plaintiff before the trial Court is that the plaintiff is the landlady and owner of the property on first floor admeasuring 2973 square feet in the premises bearing Municipal No.5-9-30/21 to 25, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad and the defendant is her tenant and that the plaintiff was taking rents from the defendant and that by virtue of the lease deed dated 01.08.1986 executed by the defendant, she was entitled to 5% increase in the rent after every 11 months, but the defendant failed to pay the enhanced rent. The plaintiff has calculated the arrears of rents and the monthly rent of the said premises totally from the defendant was Rs.7,600/- per month and then, after the expiry of

11 months 5% increase was to be made and that the defendant failed to pay the monthly rent as per the enhanced rate. The plaintiff has requested several times to clear off the arrears of rent which got accumulated but the defendant failed to clear the same and thereby, the plaintiff issued notice for eviction and also for payment of arrears of rent.

4. The defendant has filed his written statement stating that the suit is not maintainable. She admitted the relationship of landlady and tenant between the plaintiff and the defendant but she has denied the enhancement of rents and also the claim for arrears of rent. It is her case that she was paying the rents regularly and that there has been an oral agreement not to enhance the rent. She contended that she made some improvements in the suit schedule property and completed the partly unfinished construction at the suit schedule premises and therefore, there was an oral agreement of not enhancing the rent and she denied the arrears of rents alleged by the plaintiff.

5. Based on the above pleadings, the trial court has framed the following issues for trial.

“1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to seek eviction of defendant from the schedule property as prayed for?

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover arrears of rent and damages from defendant as prayed for?

3. To what relief?”

6. At the time of trial, PW1 was examined and got marked Exs.A1 to A5. On behalf of the defendant, DWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B1 to B26 were marked.

7. Considering the evidence on record, the trial Court has decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff granting the relief of eviction and also payment of arrears of rents, directing the defendant to hand over the vacant possession of the suit schedule property and also to pay the arrears of rents. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the unsuccessful defendant has preferred the present appeal.

8. Heard the submissions of Smt.P.Bhavana Rao, learned counsel for the appellants. No representation on behalf of the respondent.

9. The learned appellant counsel has submitted that the defendant has already vacated the premises but the arrears of rent as claimed by the plaintiff is too harsh on her and that she is not liable to pay any amount to the plaintiff. She further argued that the defendant has paid the rents without fail, every month and that she is not due to any extent and therefore, the decree of the trial Court with regard to the arrears of rent is not proper. She argued that there was an oral agreement between the plaintiff and defendant not to enhance the rent and that the lease agreement was perpetual in nature and so the decision of the trial Court with regard to the enhanced rate of rent is without any basis and therefore, prayed to set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.

10.