Smt.Saloni Devi Jaiswal vs B Rukkammadied Per L.R. And 2 ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2840 Tel

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.AMARNATH GOUD

                    C.R.P.No.245 OF 2018
ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the

judgment dated 14.09.2007 passed in R.A.No.20 of 2015 on

the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes

Court, Hyderabad (for short "appellate Court"), confirming the

order dated 02.11.2015 passed in R.C.No.250 of 2010 on the

file of Principal Rent Controller-cum-Junior Civil Judge,

Hyderabad, (for short, "trial Court").

2. The appellant is respondent No.1 (tenant) in R.C.No.250

of 2010 and respondent No.2 is the petitioner (landlady) in

the said rent control proceedings. Respondent No.2

succeeded the petition schedule property after the demise of

respondent No.1. The parties are herein after referred to

'appellant' and 'respondent No.2' as they are arrayed in the

appeal for the sake of convenience.

3. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 is

the absolute owner of two shops on the ground floor bearing

Municipal No.4-1-509/1 and 2, situated at Troop Bazar,

Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as "premises"). The

appellant has obtained an extent of 162 Sq.feet in the said

premises on a monthly rent of Rs.2,099.10 Ps., exclusive of

electricity charges and municipal taxes, which includes

Rs.1,049.55 Ps., towards amenities and executed a written

rental agreement dated 01.09.1994. The said premises is

situated in one of the busy commercial area in twin cities of

Hyderabad and Secunderabad and nearer to the flower and

fruit market, Cinema Theaters, hotels etc. Abids circle is half

kilometer from the said premises, wherein there are number

of shopping complexes and financial institutions in and

around the premises. In the recent past, there is steep hike

in rental value of the commercial properties at Troop Bazar

area and that the premises fetches rent of Rs.25,000/-,

therefore, she filed a Rent Control Case No.250 of 2010 under

Section 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and

Eviction) Control Act for fixation of fair rent at the rate of

Rs.25,000/- per month.

4. Per contra, the appellant denied the averments made by

the respondent No.2 and contended that she paid a sum of

Rs.2,50,000/- towards goodwill at the time of inception of

tenancy. The monthly rent is Rs.1,049.55 Ps., only and that

no amenities are provided to the premises by the respondent

No.2.

4. The trial Court, on consideration of the record, has fixed

the fair rent at Rs.15,000/- per month in respect of the said

premises with a periodical enhancement at the rate of 15% for

every three years.

5. Aggrieved by the order of the trial Court, the tenant filed

R.A.No.20 of 2016 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City

Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, and by judgment dated

14.09.2017, the appellate Court confirmed the order passed

by the trial Court. Aggrieved thereby, the present C.R.P., is

filed.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submitted that the judgment of the lower appellate Court,

confirming the order passed by the learned Rent Controller,

fixing fair rent in respect of the premises at the rate of

Rs.15,000/- per month i.e., Rs.93/- per Sq.feet is illegal,

arbitrary, high handed, unreasonably and not based on the

proper appreciation of the facts of the case, evidence and

material on record and therefore prayed to allow the revision

by setting aside the said judgment and order.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the

respondents submitted that the lower appellate Court has

passed well considered judgment and confirmed the order

passed by the trial Court by appreciating the evidence on

record and there are no grounds to interfere with the

concurrent findings of both the Courts.

7. There is no dispute with regard to jural relationship

between the parties and the property is situated in the heart

of the city in a commercial and busy locality though it was

constructed in the year 1994. It is also not in dispute that

the landlady has provided the basic amenities to the premises

including power and water supply and that it is in the multi-

storied building. Having regard to the size and utility of the

building, location and surround establishments, it can be

used exclusively for commercial purpose.

8. To prove that the premises will fetch more rental value,

respondent No.2 relied on Ex.P3 registered lease deed dated

06.07.2007 in respect of the premises admeasuring 80

Sq.feet, situated at Troop Bazar, Hyderabad, behind Rama

Krishna Theatre and the said property is fetching rent of

Rs.11,000/- per month. To prove the said fact, the

respondent No.2 filed I.A.No.15 of 2012 to summon the

witness and the trial Court dismissed the said I.A. She filed

C.R.P.No.2369 of 2012 and the High Court observed that

since Ex.P3 has not been disputed, the question of

summoning the relevant witness does not arise and that the

petition schedule property fetches fair rent of Rs.22,275/- per

month.

9. The trial Court and the appellate Court after thorough

examination of the evidence available on record have rightly

came to the conclusion that the premises will fetch fair rent of

Rs.15,000/- per month and therefore fixed the said rent with

15% enhancement for every year.

10. This Court while considering the further submissions of

Mr.Shyam S.Agarwal, counsel appearing for the appellant,

reduced the monthly rent from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.12,500/-

with 15% yearly enhancement.

11. Therefore, there are no further grounds to interfere with

the concurrent findings of both the Courts below. The tenant

is liable to pay the arrears of rent in the light of fixation of fair

rent. Since the tenant has vacated the premises and good

will amounts if any deposited with the owner shall be

adjusted.

12. For the aforesaid reasons, the Civil Revision Petition is

partly allowed to the extent indicated above by modifying the

judgment dated 14.09.2007 passed in R.A.No.20 of 2015 on

the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes

Court, Hyderabad and the order dated 02.11.2015 passed in

R.C.No.250 of 2010 on the file of Principal Rent Controller-

cum-Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad. No order as to costs. As

a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Civil

Revision Petition shall also stand dismissed.

_______________________________ JUSTICE T.AMARNATH GOUD Date: 30-09-2021.

Shr