HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.R.P.NO.2153 OF 2009 DATE: 22.03.2011 BETWEEN: S.SATYANARAYANA .. APPELLANT AND SMT K.BHARATHI .. RESPONDENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.R.P.NO.2153 OF 2009 ORDER: This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 09.03.2009 passed by the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, (the Appellate Authority under the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960) in R.A.No.169 of 2008. The unsuccessful tenant is the revision petitioner. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as ‘the landlady and the tenant’. I have heard the learned counsel on either side. In the Rent Control Case No.61 of 2007 filed by the landlady under Section 10(3)(a)(iii)(b) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short ‘the Rent Control Act’) on the ground of bona fide requirement of the landlady for commencing kirana and vegetable business, the learned Rent Controller accepting the plea of the landlady ordered eviction of the tenant by his order dated 09.05.2008. Feeling aggrieved, the tenant preferred R.A.No.169 of 2008 before the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad. By its judgment dated 09.03.2009, the learned Appellate authority confirmed the order of eviction passed by the Principal Rent Controller, Hyderabad. The tenant filed the present civil revision petition against the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below. There is no dispute about the relationship of landlady and tenant between the parties to the revision petition. There is also no dispute about the quantum of rent. It is the version of the landlady that the schedule mentioned premises, which is a mulgi is required for the purpose of commencing kirana and vegetable business for her daughter, who is deserted by her husband. The landlady was examined as PW.1 and her daughter was examined as PW.2. The respondent himself in his evidence as RW1 admitted that PW.2 is living with PW.1. Though PW.2 admitted in her evidence that she was working in a private company and getting salary of Rs.1500/-, the learned appellate authority rightly held that the said amount is not sufficient for PW.2 to maintain herself and her children in twin-cities and thus, there was genuine need for PW.2 to do some business. The tenant also admitted in his evidence before the learned Rent Controller that he has four mulgies, which were let out to the tenants. The contention of the tenant before both the Courts below that either the landlady or her daughter has no experience in the business which they proposed to commence and therefore, the requirement is said to be not bona fide. It was further contended that the sons of the landlady were residing separately and the landlady cannot seek the premises for the purpose of business of her daughter. As to the said contention, the learned appellate authority rightly held that as per the provisions of the Rent Control Act, the requirement of family members of landlady also has to be considered as the requirement of the landlady herself and no experience is required for the purpose of commencing kirana and vegetable business. Holding as such, the learned appellate authority confirmed the order of eviction passed by the learned Rent Controller. This Court in exercise of its powers under Section 22 of the Rent Control Act can interfere with the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below when the findings arrived at are either perverse or not based on evidence. In the instant case, the findings recorded by the Courts below are based on evidence on record and on adequate reasoning. This Court, therefore, can not interfere with the concurrent findings arrived at by both the authorities under the Rent Control Act. The civil revision petition is devoid of any merit and therefore, is dismissed. The revision petitioner/tenant is directed to vacate the premises within two months from the date of this order and handover the vacant possession of the same to the landlady. There shall be no order as to costs. Date:22.03.2011 _______________ R.KANTHA RAO,J kvrm HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO C.R.P.NO.2153 OF 2009 DATE: 22.03.2011