THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY SECOND APPEAL No.573 of 2009 JUDGMENT: The appellant is the tenant/lessee of the respondent in respect of commercial premises at Rikab Gunj, Hyderabad. The respondent filed O.S.No.3258 of 2004 in the Court of VIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for eviction of the appellant. He pleaded that though he issued notice to the appellant to vacate the premises, he did not accede to the request and that he committed default in payment of rents. The appellant filed a written statement in the above suit. According to him, the lease commenced in the year 1990 and that there was an oral agreement between him and the respondent for renewal of the lease for a further period of eight years and that a document was agreed to be executed. He denied the allegation as to mention of receipts. The trial Court decreed the suit through judgment dated 27.07.2007. The appellant filed A.S.No.556 of 2007 in the Court of III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The appeal was dismissed on 08.04.2009. Hence, this second appeal. Heard Sri G.Vinay Shekar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Syam S.Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent. Taking into account the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed three issues for its consideration, namely, (a) whether the plaintiff is entitled for ejectment of defendant and his men from the premises bearing No.21-1-740/1, situated at Tarachand Market, Rikabgunj, Hyderabad, which is more fully described in the schedule of the plaint; (b) whether the plaintiff is entitled for past mesne profits amounting to Rs.10,000/- from 21.04.2004 to 20.06.2004 and (c) whether the plaintiff is entitled for mesne profits @ Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of suit till recovery of possession?. The respondent deposed as P.W.1 and he filed Exs.A.1 to A.6. On behalf of the appellant, D.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B.1 to B.11, house rent receipts, were filed. On the suit being decreed, the appellant filed A.S.No.556 of 2007 and the lower appellate Court framed only one point for consideration, namely, whether the respondent is entitled for the relief of eviction of the appellant from the suit schedule property and for mesne profits. The point was answered in favour of the respondent. Hardly any substantial question of law arises for consideration. The appellant did not dispute the fact that the respondent is the owner of the premises and that he is lessee thereof. The principal contention advanced by him was that by the time the notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, marked as Ex.A.2, was issued, there was an oral understanding between the parties for extending the lease by eight years. The record discloses that every transaction or step between the parties was taking place through written documents. So much so, the appellant was insisting on issuance of receipts of the rents paid by him. If that is so, it is difficult to imagine that an important aspect as regards the renewal of lease would be transacted orally. Even though there existed any promise from the respondent for renewal of the lease, the appellant could at the most have to file a suit for specific performance. No serious defect is pointed out from the notice marked as Ex.A.2. This Court does not find any basis to interfere with the concurrent finds. The second appeal is accordingly dismissed. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that his client may be granted reasonable time to vacate the premises. Though the request is opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent, this Court is of the view that reasonable time needs to be granted to the appellant subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, time is granted to the appellant upto 31.05.2012 to vacate the premises subject to the clearance of arrears of rent, if any, within a period of four weeks from today and payment of rent on or before 10th of every succeeding month till he vacates the premises. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J Date: 23.12.2011 va