THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1918 of 2009 ORDER: This civil revision petition, under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, is directed against the order dated 19.01.2009 passed in R.C.A.No.4 of 2003 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur. It appears, the respondent herein, who is the landlord of the petitioner herein, filed R.C.C.No.59 of 1999 on the file of the learned Rent Controller-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, seeking eviction of the petitioner-tenant from the petition schedule premises, on the ground of personal requirement of the schedule premises and also for willful default on the part of the tenant in payment of monthly rents from 09.03.1999 to 13.09.1999. The petitioner resisted the petition by filing counter. The learned Rent Controller, after detailed consideration of the matter, held that the respondent-landlord could establish the bona fide requirement of the schedule premises and also that the petitioner-tenant committed willful default in payment of rents for a period of 6 months 21 days prior to filing of the petition and, accordingly, allowed the R.C.C., on 09.01.2003, directing the petitioner-tenant to vacate the petition schedule premises and handover vacant possession of the same to the respondent-landlord within two months. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal in R.C.A.No.4 of 2003 to the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, and the learned appellate Judge, having come to the conclusion that there are no valid reasons to interfere with the order passed by the learned Rent Controller, dismissed the appeal, by the impugned order dated 19.01.2009, and granted two months’ time to the petitioner to deliver vacant possession of the schedule premises to the respondent. Challenging the same, the present civil revision petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel and perused the impugned order and other material made available on record. A perusal of the orders of both the Courts below would clearly indicate that both the Courts below have considered the matter in detail and gave concurrent finding that the petitioner committed willful default in payment of rents and also that the respondent is in bona fide requirement of the schedule premises for personal use and occupation. Thus, I am of the opinion that no interference is warranted by this Court under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Rent, Lease and Eviction) Control Act, 1960. The civil revision petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed without costs. However, the petitioner is granted three months’ time from today for vacating the schedule premises and delivering its vacant possession to the respondent. In default, the respondent-landlord is entitled to get the petitioner evicted as per law. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 17.03.2010 v v