THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1403 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner is a tenant of the respondent in respect of certain premises. The rent of the building is Rs.3,300/- per month. The respondent filed O.S.No.4380 of 2004 in the Court of the Principal Rent Controller-cum-XII Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad against the petitioner, for eviction. The petitioner filed his written statement taking several pleas. He filed I.A.No.52 of 2007 under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. with a prayer to permit him to amend the written statement. He wanted to incorporate the plea referable to under Section 32 (c) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short ‘the Act’), as amended through Act 17 of 2005. The trial Court dismissed the I.A., through its order, dated 23.02.2007, placing reliance upon the Judgment of this Court in SATISHCHANDRA MAKAN vs. Dr. S.V.S.SASTRY[1]. The same is challenged in this revision. Heard Sri Nand Kishore Rathi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Suresh Shiv Sagar, the learned counsel for the respondent. The sole basis for the petitioner to seek amendment of the written statement is the amendment caused to the Act, through Act 17 of 2005. The exemption provided for under Section 32 of the Act was extended to the buildings, of which the rent is up to Rs.3,500/-. Inasmuch as the rent for the premises in question is Rs.3,300/-, the petitioner wanted to take the plea that the suit is not maintainable and proceedings, if at all, ought to have been instituted under the Act 17 of 2005. It is, no doubt, true that in the Judgment referred to supra, this Court held that the amendment caused to Section 32(c) is prospective in nature and the pending proceedings are not affected by the amendment. The fact, however, remains that a Larger Bench of this Court in RAMVILAS BAJAJ vs. ASHOK KUMAR[2] held that a person who is in possession of a building as a tenant with the rent of Rs.3,500/- or below is entitled for the protection under the Act irrespective of the stage of the proceedings. It was mentioned that even where a decree for eviction is passed, the same can be resisted at the execution stage. If the rent is below Rs.3,500/- and it is otherwise covered by the provisions of the Act. Obviously because this judgment was not brought to the notice of the trial Court, the I.A. was dismissed. This Court is of the view that the situation is squarely covered by the judgment of the Larger Bench of this Court. Hence, the civil revision petition is allowed and the order under revision is set aside. Consequently, I.A.No.52 of 2007 shall stand allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:14.09.2009 Note: Issue cc in one week. kdl [1] 2005 (3) APLJ 307 [2] 2007 (4) ALT 348 (L.B.)