Against the said order, the respondent herein preferred C.M.A. No.2 of 2007 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge-cumappellate authority under the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, Srikakulam and the same was decided by the impugned order. The appellate authority observed that after the denial of the title of the respondent herein by the revision petitioner, the respondent herein filed Ex.P.3 order of the municipality permitting construction and Exs.P.1, P.2 and P.6 to P.14 property tax receipts apart from Ex.P.15 copy of duplicate patta for the house site in support of his claim of title. The appellate authority also noted that the documentary evidence cannot be considered rebutted by the unregistered mortgage deed Ex.R.1 in favour of the revision petitioner and though the respondent herein was unable to mention the date of commencement of lease, etc., his illiteracy also should be taken into account. The appellate authority further observed that the jural relationship of landlord and tenant should have been accepted when even Ex.R.1 possessory mortgage has its period expired by 1987, after which more than 20 years elapsed by the time of the litigation. The non-examination of Geddam Dharmarao was opined to be not the obligation of the respondent herein and hence, the appellate authority accepted the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 on this aspect. The appellate authority also accepted the claims of the respondent herein about the acts of waste and bona fide requirement and consequently ordered eviction of the revision
