HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR C.R.P.No.833 OF 2007 Dated 21-1-2011 Between: Muppidi Nageswara Rao. …Petitioner. And: Kotha Veeraiah and another. Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR C.R.P.No.833 OF 2007 ORDER: Learned counsel for the respondents/landlords advanced his arguments. The schedule premises consists of two items at Door No.4/198 and 4/197. They are said to be 10 square feet in all. The tenant is said to be in occupation of the premises since about 30 years and he is said to be running a fair price shop in the premises. The premises thus is a non-residential premises. Sri K.V.Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the landlords contended that the tenant has been paying rent at Rs.50/- per month and rent deserved to be enhanced at Rs.500/- per month. The landlords laid a petition under the provisions of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act (Andhra Pradesh Rent Control Act ‘for short’) seeking for determination of the fair rent. The landlords seek that the fair rent be determined at Rs.500/- per month. The tenant obviously contended that there was no need to enhance the rent from Rs.50/-, much less at Rs.500/- per month. The learned counsel for the tenant drew my attention primarily to Exs.A.2 and A.5 out of Exs.A.1 to A.41 filed by the landlords in their favour. Ex.A.2 is the demand notice of the property tax for a period of six months at Rs.144/-. It works out to Rs.24/- per month. The learned counsel for the landlords contended that it would be unjust to pay rent at Rs.50/- whereas the very house tax is at Rs.24/- per month. More important, the landlords placed reliance upon Ex.A.5. Ex.A.5 is a registered lease deed dated 18-7-2000. It is admittedly in respect of a premises situate very much near the petition schedule premises. The extent of the petition schedule premises as well as the extent of the premises covered by Ex.A.5 is 10 square yards each. Ex.A.5 lease deed was entered into between the landlords and the tenant for the tenant to pay rent at Rs.400/- per month with an escalation clause to enhance the rent by 20% once in two years. Learned counsel for the landlords submitted that the rent for the premises under the occupation of the revision petitioner/tent deserves to be enhanced at Rs.500/- as fair rent for a similar premises in a nearby locality is about Rs.500/- per month by the date of the rent control case. Ex.A.5, as already pointed out is dated 18-7-2000. By 2002, the rent should be about Rs.500/-per month in view of the escalation clause. The rent control case was laid by the landlords herein in the year 2002. The rent by the date of the present rent control case would approximately be Rs.500/- per month for the premises covered by Ex.A.5. I agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the landlords that the rent for the present premises also deserves to be Rs.500/- per month in view of the fact that the extent of both the premises is identical and also since both the premises are situate in the same locality. The learned Rent Controller and the learned appellate authority concluded that the fair rent for the premises was Rs.500/- per month on the strength of Ex.A.5 and the oral evidence of P.W.1. The determination of fair rent at Rs.500/- by the trial Court and by the appellate Court are perfectly justified in view of Exs.A.2 and A.5 coupled with the oral evidence of P.W.1 who is the first of the two landlords. I therefore see no merits in this revision impugning determination of fair rent at Rs.500/- per month by the trial Court and the appellate Court. This revision is consequently dismissed. No costs. ______________________ Justice K.G.SHANKAR Dated 21-1-2011. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR C.R.P.No.833 OF 2007 Dated 21-1-2011