THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5237 of 2006 ORDER: Heard both sides. The petitioners are the landladies, who filed this revision under Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short ‘the Act’), inter alia, seeking to assail the correctness of the order dated 08.12.2005 passed in R.A.No.121 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, whereby the appeal was dismissed. The facts that are not in dispute are that the respondent is a tenant and the petitioners – landladies filed R.C.No.207 of 2000 before II Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, for eviction of the tenant on the ground of bona fide requirement. The Rent Controller, having found that first floor was available to the petitioners, dismissed the R.C. Therefore, the petitioners filed R.A. It was pleaded in the appeal that as the tenant has secured alternative accommodation, it is liable to be evicted. This plea is not part of the pleadings before the Rent Controller. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, especially in view of the concurrent findings arrived at by both the Courts below, it is not open for this Court in this revision filed under Section 22 of the Act to re-adjudicate or re-consider the entire issue. Hence, there are no merits in the revision. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings against the respondent on the ground that it has alternative accommodation and the same shall be disposed of, after giving opportunity to both the parties and uninfluenced by any of the observations made by this Court, in accordance with law. No costs. ___________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J 15th July, 2010 GHN