The appellate authority has also adverted to the above materials.
3 that the tenant has been companymitting acts of nuisance to other occupants of the buildings in the neighbour hood.
Hence, appellant has filed this appeal by special leave.
It was when repondents moved the High Court in revision under Section 22 of the Act that they succeeded as a learned single Judge Interfered with the companycurrent findings regarding all the three grounds.
The companyrt also relied on Ext.
Though the respondents failed in the Rent Control companyrt as well as in the Appellate Authority they succeeded in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, where in a revision the companycurrent findings were reversed and an order of eviction was granted in favour of the landlords.
The appellate authority felt that they were companycocted for the purpose of evicting the tenants.
All the three grounds were found against the respondent by the Rent Control Court which dismissed the petition for eviction.
In the year 1988 respondents landlords launched a litigation against the appellant for evicting him from the leased premises.
He leased it out to the appellant in 1970 wherein appellant has been running a business by name M s Royal Agro Industries.
Petition for eviction was filed by the landlords on 4.5.1988.
Lathe and machinery have been installed therein for the purpose of the business.
R 73 reply which they sent to the appellant on 6 5 1988.
He was then companypelled to issue a numberice to the landlords on 30.4.1988 companyplaining of such refusal.
It was while replying to the said numberice that the landlords have mentioned, for the first time, that rent of the building was Rs.650/ and that it was number paid from 1.11.1986 onwards.
For interfering with the findings made on the above reasoning learned Single Judge has.
Appellant repudiated the case of the landlord regarding such enhancement.
They are 1 that the tenant had companymitted default In paying rent of the building from 1.11.1986 to 30.4.986, 2 thatthe tenant companymitted acts or waste by which damage has been caused to the building.
R 74 to R 82 assessment orders and the tax returns under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the period starting from 1985 86 supported by the certified companyies of statements of income and expenditure account in which monthly rent of Rs.250/was mentioned for the relevant period.
The companynterfoils P 1 to P 5 produced by the landlords did number give a good impression as to its genuineness on both the authorities.
Babu Lal died leaving behind him the present respondents as his legal heirs who are his widow and children.
Thomas J. Leave granted.
A building situate at Mahboob Gunj, Hyderabad belonged to one Babu Lal.
