Dismissed

Mohd. Ashfaq Ahmed v. M a Sami Siddiqui

Telangana HC12 Jul 2011SA/537/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this second appeal, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh upheld the concurrent finding of courts below regarding the validity of a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and held that the Civil Court, not the Rent Controller, had jurisdiction. The appeal was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to vacate premises within six months and file an undertaking.

Mohd. Ashfaq Ahmed Vs M a Sami Siddiqui — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY THE TWELVETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO

¶5

SECOND APPEAL No. 537 OF 2011

¶6

Between: Mohd. Ashfaq Ahmed … Appellant V/s. M.A. Sami Siddiqui & Ors. … Respondents Counsel for the Appellant : Sri B. Vijaysen Redy Counsel for the Respondents : Sri T. V.Kalyan singh The Court made the following : Order follows next page.

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO

¶8

SECOND APPEAL No. 537 OF 2011

¶9

O R D E R :

¶10

This second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 28-1-2011 passed in AS.No. 50 of 2008 by the I- Additional District Judge, Nizamabad, confirming the judgment and decree dated 22-7-2008 passed in OS.No. 505 of 2002 by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nizamabad district, whereby and whereunder the suit filed by the plaintiff was partly decreed with proportionate costs directing the defendants to vacate the suit premises and handover the possession of the suit premises to the plaintiff along with furniture, fixtures, material and articles within one month from the date of judgment and granted liberty to the plaintiff to file separate petition for ascertaining mesne profits.

¶11

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents.

¶12

3. Both the courts below concurrently held that the rent of the mulgi payable since 1997 is Rs.40/- and disproved the contention of the defendant that the rent can be bifurcated as Rs.40/- towards rent and Rs.50/- for fixtures. Consequently both the courts below have recorded concurrent finding that the Rent Controller under the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 has no jurisdiction and the Civil Court alone has jurisdiction.

¶13

4. Both the courts below have also held that notice issued by the landlord under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act is valid and the tenant is liable for eviction. This Court cannot interfere with the concurrent finding of fact recorded by both the courts below.

¶14

Therefore, the judgment and decree passed by the Appellate Authority under the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 confirming the order and decree passed by the Rent Controller is confirmed in the second appeal and the second appeal is dismissed. The appellant-tenant is directed to vacate the premises within six months from the date of judgment in the second appeal, besides filing of undertaking to the said effect within three weeks from the date of this judgment.

¶15

5. In the result, the second appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶16

____________________________ JUSTICE R . KANTHA RAO 12-07-2011 I s L

¶17

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO

¶18

SECOND APPEAL No. 537 OF 2011

¶19

Circulation No. 35 Date:12-07-2011 Court Master: I s L Computer No. 43

Mohd. Ashfaq Ahmed v. M a Sami Siddiqui

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Ashfaq Ahmed v. M a Sami Siddiqui

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bajireddy Sudershan Vs The Land Acquisition Officer

Bonu Saraswathi Vs Dandi Kirshna

Shaik Jameel Ali, Vs Miryalkar Gandhi

A.Hampaiah Vs a.Eswaraiah

Rajesh Kumar Agarwal Vs Naresh Kumar

Dummala chandra Rao Vs a.P.State Electricity Board