HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.R.P.NO.1978 OF 2008 DATE: 01.04.2011 BETWEEN: Bodapati Raghavaiah .. Petitioner AND Sha Kishore Kumar .. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.R.P.NO.1978 OF 2008 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel on either side. This revision petition is directed against the Judgment, dated 16.04.2008 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali in R.C.A.No.2 of 2005 whereby and whereunder the learned Senior Civil Judge reversed the order dated 04.04.2005 passed by the I Additional Junior Civil Judge,FAC, Principal Junior Civil Judge, (Rent Controller), Tenali in R.C.C.No.18 of 2000 declining to evict the tenant from the schedule mentioned premises. The Appellate Authority under the Rent Control Act rightly held that on the mere ground that the respondent filed the eviction petition for his bona fide requirement to run his readymade garments since he purchased the premises from the original owner, the genuineness as to the requirement cannot be doubted. It is observed by the appellate Court that there is no bar under Section 10(3)(a)(iii)(b) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 that the purchaser who purchased the premises from the landlord cannot apply under Section 10 for eviction until the period of three months is expired. Therefore, the finding of the Rent Controller that the bona fides of the purchaser have to be doubted in view of the filing eviction petition six months after purchase is without any basis. The learned appellate Court also rightly held that the mere fact that the respondent/landlord is jointly owned another premises along with his brother is not a ground to refuse the relief of eviction sought for by him. The schedule premises is the exclusive property of the landlord, he wants to commence his own business from the said premises in readymade garments. Thus, the judgment rendered by the learned appellate Authority reversing the order passed by the Rent Controller is based on evidence and strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Control Act, and this Court will not interfere with the said findings, since they cannot be either said to be perverse or not based on evidence on record. The civil revision petition is therefore, dismissed confirming the Judgment, dated 16.04.2008 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali in R.C.A.No.2 of 2005. The revision petitioner is directed to vacate the schedule mentioned premises within a period of six months from the date of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ R.KANTHA RAO,J Date:01.04.2011 Kvrm HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.R.P.NO.1978 OF 2008 DATE: 01.04.2011